User talk:Ljfthompson
Hello, I am testing out this page.
Tutorial 2
Pick between Activities 1/2 and do Activity 3:For information on what constitutes a reliable source - check here: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources
If you had created this article first - what would you have done differently? If you were the second reader, how would you have edited the article? Write up your thoughts on your user page (100-200 words is plenty).
Tutorial 3
This weeks Online Lecture - its long, don't watch it in the seminar: https://canvas.sydney.edu.au/courses/6794/pages/online-lecture-3-wikipedia-in-a-post-fact-world. Youtube Mirror if you want to save some time and watch it at 1.25/1.5 speed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJybD75QxAM).
Pick two of the four activities for this week's seminar.
When you're done, send me an email (lucas.thompson@sydney.edu.au) with your user page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:username/OLES2129). On your user page should be the content for the activity (the talk page for the article that was edited or your description for Activity 1). Email subject line should be OLES2129 - Activities 1/2/3/4 depending on which activities you chose. If you decided to work in pairs - send me the link to both user pages.
When you edit a talk page on Wikipedia, make sure you add your signature to the end of your post. You can do this by typing ~~~~.
If it is already a high-quality or featured article, random again. If not, on your user page briefly describe what steps would be required to elevate the article's rating to an A-class article on that WikiProject's scale.
Add an appropriate tag to the page from the following list: Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Verifiability and sources. You can use an inline tag or an individual message box for the entire article depending on the severity of the lack of citations. Open up a discussion on the article's Talk page about why the citation is needed.
Take a look at the following link for good ways to address simple paraphrasing issues: Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing#Addressing.
Here is a good place to start for some tips on how to do it: Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems.
Information on each section for tagging can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup
Tutorial 4
Post your group discussion on your OLES2129 user page.
Post the framework of your article on a branch of your user page: Special:MyPage
Find an article on the topic of your choice. Draw up a framework for your article on your OLES2129 user page. There is a good sample layout located here.
If you complete that, feel free to go through the Article Wizard to begin your article creation.
Don't worry too much about content, focus on layout and sections.
Send me a link to your draft page (Special:MyPage) when you are finished.
Tutorial 5
https://canvas.sydney.edu.au/courses/6794/pages/references-and-reference-lists
All the information is on the modules - I've replicated it here for your convenience. Email me your OLES2129 user page link so I can mark you off for completing activity 1.
For the article that you've found:
1. Add one source using the visual editor.
2. Add one source using the source editor.
Propose the article.
Find your associated WikiProject and point out any standardised tools that you will use for your article (infoboxes, article structure etc).
Find five sources that you will use and present them in the form of an annotated bibiliography.
Now is a great time to start! UPDATE: Assignment details: https://canvas.sydney.edu.au/courses/6794/assignments/37028
Tutorial 6
Activity today will be about how to do an annotated bibliography. Do a write up on your user page and email when done.
Pick a featured article as a group and pick one of the sources that the article references.
Discuss the reliability and usefulness of the source based on:
Scholarship
Author’s background
Where was the source published?
Is the information within the source independently verifiable?
Context
Age of source relative to topic
Intent of information, targeted audience
Content
Does the source omit important details and overrepresent others?
Is the information fact or opinion? (This doesn’t necessarily disqualify the source from use but does mark against objectivity)
Style and structure of content.
These are examples of things that you can choose to cover in your annotated bibiliography, its likely you won't have the word count in your assignment to deal with all of these for each source. Pick what you think is most important.
Tutorial 7
Creative Commons Activity today!
Do the Canvas module (with the associated Wikimedia module) first.
Find pictures that you can use for your chosen article - add them to your user page draft branch (e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:yourusername/OLES2129/draft) and email me the link.
For more information on what is considered acceptable use of non-free media on Wikipedia, see this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Acceptable_use
Tutorial 8
Peer Review Activity
After a demonstration on how to perform a Peer review, get into groups of two and work on reviewing two random Wikipedia articles together.
It would be good to look at one that is considered good quality and one that is not. Beyond looking at the generic pages for quality articles, please also look at the article's WikiProject quality scale and comment on how well it adheres to those criteria.
Some helpful resources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simplified_Manual_of_Style
I'm looking for both positive feedback and constructive criticism for the Peer review so try and keep to those standards. Don't just say "this is bad" say "this could've been done better if you did x."
As always, email me the link to your team effort (on your individual OLES2129 user page).
Ljfthompson, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]
|
Hi Ljfthompson! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 25 January 2019 (UTC) |
Welcome[edit]
Hello, Ljfthompson, and welcome to Wikipedia! It appears you are a course instructor leading a class project.
- New to Wikipedia or want to learn about best practices for Wikipedia assignments?
The training includes instructions for setting up a structured course page, with tools for tracking student work and encouraging peer review. Please also see this helpful advice for instructors.
If you run into problems or want some feedback on your Wikipedia assignment plans, try posting to the education noticeboard.
We hope you like it here and encourage you to stay after your assignment is finished! Adam9007 (talk) 04:28, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
A page you started (Postcritique) has been reviewed![edit]
Thanks for creating Postcritique.
User:Doomsdayer520 while reveiwing this page as a part of our page curation process had the following comments:
Thank you for your new article on Postcritique.
To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Doomsdayer520}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .
Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.
---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:09, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Postcritique[edit]
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Postcritique you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 01:22, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Postcritique[edit]
The article Postcritique you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Postcritique for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 19:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |