Talk:An Internet of Everything?/Surveillance and Sousveillance

Comments on the Project
Hey guys, this comment is a little late as I just realized it initially went onto the Special Comments section so I've moved it up her so everyone can see. I added a few last minute things in (since this isn't due until 5pm). First of all in Surveillance's YouTube section I inserted the Anti Tesco riots that happened in Stokes Croft. Then in Sousveillance I removed the "read more" bit from Citizen journalism because it didn't read right since we are supposed to be telling people what is happening and instead changed it onto sentences about User Comments and credibility (the references are still there), I have also put references in for the fifth estate, the Ferguson Unrest and the main concepts of sousveillence to make it look a bit more professional/clean. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 12:58, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi a bit late to the party but I'm going to write abut Social Media analysis on Surveillance Technologies. HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 09:24, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Yello, I'll be doing a segment on Tempora and "the five eyes" concept over the next few days contribs) 00:17, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello guys, So last year I had started to do work for this but never actually submitted it (side note - POST STUFF ASAP) Would anyone want to help me go through a bunch of reports for useful segments? Rocketpunch7 (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, so I'm still not sure what sure what Sousveillance is but I'm sure that having a general cross group discussion will help with no only that issue but with finding out other things from across the groups. (I am in the group undatables by the way!) I've been looking at the past years discussion pages and they all seem to find it helpful! The only thing I've found that is making me understand the difference so far is a photo of a camera pointing down at a stick man and the stick man looking ta the camera with a camera on its head. Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 15:26, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I think everybody is not sure what the terms mean or how to analyse them in a way that would make the ideas clear to others. We could all begin from the Definition for some general info and then read as broadly as possible so we can start from somewhere. There are several articles like these Article1, Article2 that help as well.Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 11:04, 24 February 2016 (UTC)Rocketpunch7 (discuss •

They are really helping thank you! I also found a small blog post x which just simply compares the differences between Surveillance and Sousveillance and although it's short its nice to have some sort of clarity and ways of explaining the difference between them both! Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 08:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi all, this is very helpful as I was quite confused myself. It seems then that sousveillance is the recording of yourself (and perhaps other parties in that activity), so possible topics we could cover are the recording of phone conversations as mentioned in the definition (either for legal or personal reasons, or illegally). Vlogging could also be covered perhaps as that's taking a video of yourself doing an activity? and hey we could even talk about Shia LaBeouf and all the live broadcast events he holds such as watching his own movies or going up that elevator as that falls under the definition I believe. What do people think? --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 12:46, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey there, I`m also in the group ,,undatables´´ and I found an interesting website and also an ebook, that may help us to understand these terms. Firstly, you can access the ebook about surveillance here, you just need to download or open it. I think it´s very interesting that they describe sousveillance as a kind of ,,inverse surveillance´´. This ebook does also provide a link to a website called Surveillance & Society and I think that they provide articles, concerning this issue. Hopefully I could help. I think we should start deviding it into subpoints, so that every group can get started. --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 10:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey I've added a place for everyone to put their usernames down so we know who's all working on the project! ItsMartholomew (discuss • contribs) 11:54, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi all, thanks for these great tips, to get a review about the topic. I agree that we should create a structure so that we know who wants to write about what and what aspects are missing. Does anyone know how to make a table? So that we know who wants to write about what and what aspects are missing. Does anyone know how to make a table? So that we can divide it for example into topics, subtopics and our names. Mausjjudith (discuss • contribs) 12:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

So I think I managed to make a table, I'll edit it later when I get home! [@Mausjjudith] ItsMartholomew (discuss • contribs) 12:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Reaching back to the vlogging idea, I think especially in today's society and how a larger number of people are now engaging with that aspect really well. It would definitely give a more modern twist to the chapter. There is a few people you could mention Pointless blog (x) or Roman Atwood (x) however there is one thing that may cause an issue. Obviously daily vlogging is more Sousveillance because they are documenting their lives however where do other youtubers may lie? For example Roman Atwood does a "prank" channel (x) where people don't really know they are being filmed (at first at least.) If he was to pull a prank on the general public - which I'm sure if you go through his channel he has done so before - and blurred out faces because he hasn't gotten their permission could that lean more to the surveillance side? As the saying is "you never know when big brother is watching." If you could argue that youtube is both then that could make for a really good subheading in this chapter and help bulk things out a little more. (Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 12:18, 1 March 2016 (UTC))

I really like your hypothesis about the crossing and blurring of the boundaries between surveillance and sousveillance and I would like to work with you on that topic. User The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 14:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Guys before we start separating the work into groups put your name in the Contributors list with the name of your group on the side. Make sure you discuss within your groups what you want to write about before jumping in the conversation as it will make this page really messy and difficult to follow.Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 13:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

There's lots of electronic resources on the University's Library Catalogue that we can all use for references. There's fewer on Sousveillance but there's dozens on Surveillance so that topic shouldn't be too much of a struggle. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 14:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Also I looked up the main concepts of each of them and found these two sites. They give quite a clear and concise example which makes it easy to understand the difference between Surveillance and Sousveillance Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 14:51, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks I think that is a really good place to start. I feel like Sousveillance is going to be the harder one to talk about in this chapter and trying to find resources is going to take a lot of work!

Hey so I've just caught up on everything that's been said on this page (I didn't realise I had to go into 'discussion'). Anyway, all this information is really useful I'll put in some more input after doing research. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 15:08, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi everyone, I like Kyra Paterson did not know I had to go into the discussion page. If any one wants to collaborate or needs assistance with their section please feel free to reach out. Also does anyone know how to reference and cite? Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 16:19, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Pamela.nx, personally, I use the reference system we have to use in essay, just because I'm used to it, and it makes my job easier. But I don't think it matters which system you use, as long as you put down all the necessary information you need to find an article, chapter etc. If you meant the practical part of referencing you just have to use " " at the end. Hope it was helpful. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 18:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I just added a section about Power politics which will discuss the relationship between political power and the connection we have with our devices and how the concept of surveillance/sousveillance may possibly assist in enabling political power agendas.If any one wants to collaborate or has any helpful information feel free to speak out. Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 16:43, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I would like to do a definition of surveillance and sousveillance for the introduction, so that one gets a first impression of what it is about. Mausjjudith (discuss • contribs) 10:09, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guysǃ I was wondering how many people do we want working on each section? At the moment it's been two per topic, can it be more or is that a good number to stick to? Also I've added topics that were suggested and place on the Books section into the content table below, if the people who wanted to work on them want to add their names. I was thinking of working on surveillance technologies if whoever put that up is cool with us working on it together? Oh and last thing, what should fall under the heading of 'Main Concepts' and what should have it's own section? How do we want to structure it that way?--HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 15:47, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I may be asking a stupid question here but how are we splitting this up into our groups as it kind of looks like we are one big group all going to be adding to the page. Is it just a case of each group working on separate topics within the main page? Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 20:52, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

First of all there are no silly questions here as everybody tries to help the other. It was my suggestion that we register ourselves with our group name but as individuals might want to work separately from their group I feel that everyone should feel free to add to any topic they want. Personally, I will try to add some ideas on Sousveillance so feel free to add and correct me.Srepanis (discuss) • contribs) 23:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay this has been helpful thank you. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 10:26, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Remember to sign only on the discussion page as it makes the book/chapters look messy. Also, I've started on an introduction and will post it up within the next hour or so, if anyone feels like more should be added (or taken away) feel free to do so. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 13:18, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I think we should put the section "Surveillance Technologies" into the same section as "Organisations for Surveillance" and change the heading to something like "Organisations and Technologies for Surveillance". Does that sound good? That way we can make the paragraph bolder/bulkier as it is the organisations that use those technologies. Also a good section for Sousveillance would be a bit about Citizen Journalism as that is literally the general public going up against those under Surveillance restrictions. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 13:51, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Yeah that sounds good. I'm planning on writing a piece relating to an article suggested above Article2 which researches how the public react to people wearing cameras and recording people around them. I will add this section in soon. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 14:18, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

That sounds like a really good piece to do. If anyone needs help on Sousveillance I recommend watching/listening to this video, it's quite long but has some really good points that could be used in this chapter. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 14:49, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys! I agree on all the things that are discussed below and above my comment. I had a look at what the other groups have done, and the all had one mistake in common. Like Greg says, the most important thing here that is being marked, is our contribution both to the discussion here and to the book. So here comes the first question: how do we show we contribute? If we only put our user tag in the discussion, we would only get points for here. However, if we put it also on the book page, then our contribution would be higher. I agree that the page would look messy, but this is the way to get good marks. But then comes the second question - I believe everybody who is on the contributor list is working towards the success of the group, thus, we must make sure the guys here PASS the module for sure. How? Simply, by putting all of the contributors' names under every section and gaining more contribution not only for ourselves but for everyone who's working. If the only problem with this is 'how the sections would look like', then I believe we can be creative in the design. I am looking forward to your opinions on this! :) Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 17:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Gvg00001 This is an interesting idea and would be a great way to bump up everyone's marks...but could it not be classed as cheating (in a way). Also when Greg goes into our account contributions would he not see that some of us may not have contributed to a particular section yet our names will be on them? I'm not 100% sure on how it works. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 19:06, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I've started the section of 'Public reactions to Surveillance' and will be adding to it over the next few days. Please feel free to edit it in anyway you can to enhance the point. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 19:41, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Kyra Paterson, no, it's not cheating, because we are grouped together and all of us contribute in one or another way. As long as a user is tagged in a section, he/she has contributed somehow. Furthermore, some users may have contributed in the editing part of the task rather than in the writing. Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 20:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Gvg00001 Okay dokey well that sounds good to me then. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 20:57, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys, i really like the idea to sign everybody for every section, somehow my username is not mentioned there. Who created this list and could you please add my name to it? I tried it but it looks different from the way other user names are mentioned there. And just to clarify for myself, when I'm working on an entry do I then still have to sign it with my name, or does the list of names already include that? Thanks in advance!--Handkel (discuss • contribs) 21:55, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys I have seen a lot of year books so far and none of them includes writers on the main page.Here is an example https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Digital_Media_and_Culture_Yearbook_2014/Chapter_3:_Always-on_Culture#References. The tutor can see the contributors on the page's view history so have no worries about this. I did the same thing to track those who made changes and added this list so I am asking you to remove it because it makes the whole thing unattractive and it's pointless. Thanks Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 22:07, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey guys,   I am fairly certain that Greg and Simon said in the labs that you don't need to sign the main page. It doesn't affect your marks because they can track what work we have done using the contribs. So yes, it is a good idea to sign our name on the discussion page for sure, but as  said, doing this on the main Wikibook could make our page messier and maybe even lose marks. I imagine it (might) be okay to have one list at the bottom of the Wikipage of all the contributors, but I really don't think we have to sign every piece of work / section. I'm going to email Greg just to check, he might not reply though as I think we are meant to be on our own from now on. Just want to be safe!Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 13:58, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, guys! Can someone help me with the main at the beginning of every law section? I can't make them work :( Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs)

Hi there, does anyone know how this is going to be graded in terms of our specific group and individually? At the moment it seems to be very much a matter of everyone working individually while simultaneously as a whole, which seems to make sense, but I don't understand why we are in small groups to begin with? I want to start contributing to some of the topics, but I don't want to be going completely off course. Thanks in advance. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 22:41, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi NoRagrets9, I think it will be graded individually, but the groups are useful to interact with each other and add to your contribution. I hope it helps. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 18:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Evp09 That does help, thank you. I see now that it is mostly graded on contributions and cooperation which makes sense as it is a wikibook after-all and thats what ive hopefully done. Thanks! NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 19:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys, Judith and me were just wondering who wrote the text about Laws and restrictions, including the power bill, since we signed up for this aspect first and already put lots of effort in our research and are now not able to upload our research information? --139.153.57.60 (discuss) 08:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC) --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 08:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

I am wondering too, because I also signed up for doing the definitions of sourveillance and sousveillance and you already did that too. If you can have a look on the 'history view' you can see that you have already done a lot of aspects. Maybe you could give others the chance to write some aspects, because we are a lot of people and everyone has to write something. Mausjjudith (discuss • contribs) 11:48, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi guys, I got confirmation from Greg that we definitely do not sign on the main section of the Wikibook.


 * '''Hi Cory - you are correct, and they are wrong. If people start signing stuff on the main page it looks awful and they will get chased up by the admins for doing precisely that.

You're right, I did explicitly state this in the wiki labs.'''

It is important that we don't sign guys because we don't want anything to get deleted. Cheers. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 13:22, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys, sorry I think that Judith and me might have chosen the wrong words. With signing up - we meant signing up for covering an aspect, in this case laws and restrictions. Where someone else uploaded a lot of information, that was just quoted from Wikipedia. But we figured it out now, thanks anyways for the answers :)! --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 13:53, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing this up Now I want to ask if there is anyone who is currently working on any of the following or feels like working with something extra
 * 1) Google, Credit cards, ID system and other forms of Corporate Surveillance
 * 2) Foucault's ideas of Panopticon discussed in his Discipline and Punish book
 * 3) Anonymous, Wikileaks, Chealsea Manning and other famous whistleblowers

Also   are you still interested in writing something about Vlogging and Lifecasting under the sousveillance chapter? I would find your text really helpful. Can the person who uploaded the bra cam on the definition of sousveillance replace it with something more mainstream or explain why he/she put there? Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 17:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Yes I would be interested still. I backed away because it seemed people were covering it so I went into surveillance technologies but I can do both as I'm quite interested in Vlogging and Lifecasting, I added 'Sousveillance and Celebrity Culture' as a title in order to speak about this aspect. --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 11:08, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys! Yeah, was me writing about laws. Sorry, I was so immersed in the work, didn't mean to take anyone's work. Apologies! :) Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs

@Gvg00001 if you can contribute to something I don't think it can be considered taking over in this situation as the goal is to work cooperatively into making a good, full final product :) --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys I have a really good book that we can use if anyone is stuck on how to get their section of the project going,If anyone is interested this the book Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 13:39, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys,I just need to know if my group members know what our group name is? and if not what should it be? and have we sent on in? Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 13:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Pamela.nx, Justalex 28 sent an email to Greg.Our group name is KESAP.I hope that helps.Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 13:48, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys! I want to add another topic on our page but I cant seem to be able to do that. Can anyone advise me on how to do this?Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 14:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am going to cover a little subtopic exploring whether or not there is art, or some artistic form, related to sousveillance. If you come across information or are keen to share your opinions, please feel free to comment! Comments and additions are well accepted -i don't bite...usually, lol- thank you :) --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 14:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Thanks,Evp09 for the group name. just a reminder to team KESAP that most of our contribution marks are based on our engagement on this discussion page, not just on each others talk pages. The interactions we have with each other as well as other groups involved with surveillance/sousveillance is importantEvp09Justalex 28 Petrichorblue Rocketpunch7

Hi people who contributed to the 'types of surveillance' part, I found a different type of categorization for surveillance, if you're interested I can send you the link for it. It's by Gary T. Marx. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 15:34, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs)
 * Hi @Evp09! I wrote about the types of surveillance. I couldn't figure much out beside the info on Wikipedia and can add some more. If you want to add anything, go ahead! :)


 * Hi @Gvg00001 thanks, I'll add what I've found and if you think it's not relevant you can edit it. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 19:31, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

To the person/people writing about the mcdonald's attack ...I come in peace. Do not consider this as an intrusion but rather a little tip. I was just reading through it and although I don't know if it is completed as it is or if it is still a work in progress, the fact that it finishes with the mentioning of a six years old sketch sounds a bit incomplete, at least in my opinion, as there is no shown picture to complete the statement and, is it really relevant? What I mean is that anedocte aside, you might want to expand on that for the implications it has, for example that a six year old is able to produce a simplified version of how the system works (meaning therefore that the concepts underlying such a broad, debated and shady topic could be resumed in a nutshell with a sketch?), and maybe, just for the sake of it, link to the picture or post it on the book? <- if you find it is an important element... this links might bring to something (including said sketch/sketches) http://wearcam.org/tedscript/chapter1.htm https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=mcdonald%27s+attack+mann&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=969&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwikq4CeurHLAhWDyRQKHdEDB6oQ_AUIBigB#tbm=isch&q=surveillance+dynamics+mann&imgrc=wWWNPcpvjdEK5M%3A ... --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys! I'm noticing a lot of repetition content wise, I was thinking of going through it tonight and flagging up any sections that say the same thing just so it's a bit more cohesive over all. Is that cool with people? --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 16:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi HoDstripes that would be great, I think it's an excellent idea! As the content is much more now, it got really hard to keep track of all of the content on the page. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 18:50, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

HoDstripes Yeah that's cool with me. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 20:04, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, just an aesthetic thing but if people are adding images, here is a Wiki article on how to make them go to the left instead of the right and also just general tips = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 00:48, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@HoDstripes Hi I emailed Greg about this and he said we can tie up things into other chapters like please see chapter 'it’s probably a really good idea to put an internal wiki link in your section to the other user’s section. The markup is something like book/chapter/other section. In fact, getting your team to last-minute scour the entire book for content that relates to your own chapter page and making these links would be really useful in tying things together' HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 17:32, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, do you mean with ,,tie things together´´ that when we are for example mentioning the definition of surveillance later on in a topic, that we should just link to the section on the book page, where the definition is? Sorry if I'm bothering you, I'm just not sure if I understood what you mean. Because then I'm starting to revise my section and link to other sections within the book. -Handkel (discuss • contribs) 11:14, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@ -Handkel not specific words just if sections are similar. For example in my post about screen shot as an infidelity technique I touched on something similar to another person who spoke about Screenshots as art. Some of our content was quite similar ie we both spoke about screenshots as forms of entertainment so I think if it's only if you are goping to run into someone else's territory. Another example is my work on postal surveillance Beofdre going into the newly defined laws I put a link to the page with laws on them because I would be wasting my and other people's time reiterating them if you get what I mean. HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 14:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@HoDstripes Thanks for the link I was just wondering how to do that! Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 18:43, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Can I ask who is contributing to the social media/analysis of Technology, what they're doing andif they need any help. Thanks HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 19:43, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@-HandkelI did respond to you earlier just for some reason the tag didn't catch on.

Hi guys,just wanted to say to all the groups well done on what we have achieved,our page looks pretty good.Also I dont know who did the section on companies but I added another paragragh,if thats okay.Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 16:53, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Special Guests' Comments
Hey ho everyone, Chickpeanut (discuss • contribs) jumping over here from a different group. I've read the introduction to a book called "The Googlization of Everything", and there is a whole chapter on Google & surveillance which looked very relevant to you. So maybe this helps with your research? Just dropping this here in case you want to follow this up. Good luck with your chapter --Chickpeanut (discuss • contribs) 18:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion there is a separate section on our page now for you and everyone else who wants to contribute. Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 13:40, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Does anyone know how correctly reference in an image, was wanting to add some to the citizen journalism section but I am fairly unsure and don't want to take away from what we've achieved as a standard on our wiki page so far? Also wondering if anyone else is struggling with this still? I really should have used this discussion more because every time I've went to edit something I've already researched something along the lines of what I've said has been said already. GlasgowTexan (discuss • contribs) 16:13, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

So your problem is that you have the image but don't know how to reference it? You just add the image and it should have the credit info when clicking on it. You don't need to mention anything at the ReferencesSrepanis (discuss • contribs) 16:17, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Contributors
A list of the people who are contributing to this chapter.


 * 1) ItsMartholomew (discuss • contribs) Wiki Wiki What?!
 * 2) Rocketpunch7 (discuss • contribs)(KESAP)
 * 3) --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 11:59, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 4) Mausjjudith (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 5) --Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 12:20, 1 March 2016 (UTC) Undatables
 * 6) The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 12:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC) Undatables
 * 7) Srepanis (discuss contribs) The Straight Outta Pubtons Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 13:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 8) MLCRooney (discuss contribs) The Straight Outta Pubtons
 * 9) The Small Moray (discuss contribs) The Straight Outta Pubtons
 * 10) KerryFromThePub (discuss contribs) The Straight Outta Pubtons
 * 11) HayleyJo87 (discuss contribs) The Straight Outta Pubtons HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 12:43, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 12) GlasgowTexan (discuss • contribs) 14:19, 1 March 2016 (UTC) Wiki Wiki What?!
 * 13) Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 14:21, 1 March 2016 (UTC)(KESAP)
 * 14) Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 14:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC) Wiki Wiki What?!
 * 15) Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 14:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC) Undatables
 * 16) Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 15:05, 1 March 2016 (UTC) (undateables)
 * 17) Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 15:50, 1 March 2016 (UTC)(KESAP)
 * 18) Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 16:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)(KESAP)
 * 19) --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 19:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC) (Wiki Wiki What?ǃ)
 * 20) --Idkun (discuss • contribs) 19:43, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 21) Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 17:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 22) --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 12:47, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * 23) --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 13:29, 8 March 2016 (UTC)(KESAP)
 * 24) NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 22:30, 8 March 2016 (UTC)]] (Look Around You)
 * 25) --Kellysun960601 (discuss • contribs) 22:51, 9 March 2016 (UTC) (Look Around You)

Topics Discussion
Hey, just last thing before it's finished tomorrow was thinking of these pernickity things. People have been doing this I'm sure anyway but yeah if anyone spell checks an area or fixes syntax in it maybe just fill it in here and mark it off? That way we know the whole thing has that done for it and there won't be anything wrong in that way. --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 01:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Organizations for Surveillance
Hey Guys, I was planning on continuing research into the various government organizations for surveillance like Prism and Tempora as well as the five eyes, does anyone want to help with this? Rocketpunch7 (discuss • contribs) 11:53, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I would like to help you with this, sounds really intereseting and I think this is a very important aspect. We could split it up into sections, so we could work seperately and then we could maybe also add some of the important terms to the section ,, terms and definitions´´ (if this exists), which organizations would you prefer to work on? @Rocketpunch7  --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 12:05, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Perfect, I can split it up on the book page into the chapters and we can just pic and choose which ones we want to do? Rocketpunch7 (discuss • contribs) 12:19, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay. Just let me know when you split it up and what organization have to cover. @ Rocketpunch7 --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 10:16, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey I was just wondering if I am still supposed to cover an aspect of those three that you have mentioned at the beginning or if you are doing that on your own? Thanks !--Handkel (discuss • contribs) 16:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Surveillance technologies
Hey, just wondering who originally put this up as a topic and if I could work on it with you? And if it was just put up as an idea but not necessarily something you wanted to work on, is there anyone else who wants to write it with me? I assume we will be looking at the physically technologies that track activity, such as bots online and CCTV cameras, perhaps their history as well as a subheading? Thank youǃǃ --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 16:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I wasn't the one who put it up originally but the topic sounds interesting and I'd like to help out Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 19:39, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, as I'm on your group and I also like the look of this one, I could definitely assist you on this bit! I've got a digital media textbook that I'm going to flick through just now and see if I can use it to find anything useful on surveillance technologies. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 14:24, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Update: I have made a start on the CCTV section of Surveillance Technologies with a couple references. I have to head in to work now so its only a basic start that hopefully we can expand on. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 15:24, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Would you say that Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras would fall under CCTV, or their own category, as while they are cameras they aren't focused on recording all activity in front of them, just the number plates? Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 19:44, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I honeslty have no idea but it could potentially make a good bit of discussion for the main page as to what category that falls under so you could look into that maybe. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 13:40, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Just realised my post isn't there. I'm asking at the reading room and I'm sure my mark up is fine. Any of you guys know why my post won't appear? ;( HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 20:15, 9 March 2016 (UTC

Hey, I was wondering if you guys either need some help/ if I could help by contributing to some of these Surveillance Technologies? I was quite interested in researching the whole telephone idea and how new smart phones have had a major impact on how we live our daily lives and how so much personal information can be monitored and so on? Or if there is anyone already interested, I would like to work with you on it. Thanks. MLCRooney (discuss • contribs) 16:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey of course go ahead with that section. There seems to be a lot of different aspects to surveillance technologies so there's a lot to explore. Thank you to whoever made that big list, it makes it easier to start somewhere when writing. Sorry I've been offline since Thursday as I was away for the weekend so I've missed a bit but on it now to write a bunch for that list of categories, as well as maybe a 'history' and 'controversy' section. What do you guys think? Thank you @Thedellboy and @Petrichor for joining me as well. --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 17:19, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Just looking through the list of different surveillance technologies (thank you to whoever made that!) and Human microchipping really caught my eye. I know I'm a little late to the discussion, as I had an operation last week so been recovering. if its OK with you guys I would really like to do some research into the human micro chipping section. Would be interesting to discuss whether it would be used merely for medical information or if it could be used for a lot more invasive purposes. Let me know what you guys think! Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 15:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey  someone made the list in another section but I just moved it across to the relevant section, its pretty handy. Yeah that sounds totally fine! This is one of the biggest sections of the wikibook so we need all the help we can get to be fair. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey I will get started on writing that in the book just now then once I've completed the research Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 14:34, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Just put up a post about how screen shots can be used as a surveillance device after the model Emily Sears was screen shotting the dick pics men were sending her and threatening to tell their girlfriends, etc. Please look and comment :) It's under surveillance technologies - social media analysis thanks HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 14:10, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey do you think biometrics and human microchipping would fit into the same category of surveillance technology or not? Also in general to this group, should we start deleting some of the categories that are repetitive? --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 16:35, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey That's what I was thinking, i'm not sure how relevant it is to surveillance, because when I was researching it, it seemed more about providing medical info about people rather than watching them and using it as a source of surveillance. And yeah, I think we could maybe clean it up a little bit and get rid of the repetitive sections. Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 19:52, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Is anyone already planning on doing the telephone section? If not, I'll do that. Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 21:47, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey I was going to do some more work on social media and the post system. That cool with everyone? HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 10:26, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey I've already got most of my stuff ready for the Telephone section, just wanted to let you know before you start work and I post mine up! Sorry! There's still lots of Surveillance Technology needing filled in though however, such as; Human Operatives, Satellite Imagery, Identification and credential, Geological devices, postal services. A far as I know I don't think anyone else has claimed these. Everyone who has claimed something for that section, has posted here. Good luck with your section. MLCRooney (discuss • contribs) 11:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok thanks for letting me know. I'll take another look at the list Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 12:51, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi again, I was wondering if anyone writing about their chosen Technology, have chosen to include any information about the legal or ethical concerns in relation to their specific technologies? Like for example the systems used to monitor telephones, and the specific problems they pose? I didn't want to take away from the actual Ethical Concerns or the Legislation parts of the wikibook but I feel like it's relevant? Anyone got any advice? Should I add onto the other areas or simply reference those parts in my post? Getting myself a little confused here, thanks for the help! MLCRooney (discuss • contribs) 15:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, this is just my personal opinion so I have no idea if I'm right, but I'd make like minor references to ethical concerns in this section, and then link / refer to the ethical concerns page for more details. Its me and a few others heading up that section, its looking pretty sweet so far, and I'd be more than happy for others to add into it. So if you have anything to say ethically about the technologies, you can also add it into that section, I think that would work. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 16:14, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the advice, it's good to know that you're also working on that section, I didn't want to impose or take anything away from anyone else, I'll definitely link to your section as well as the Legislation section, maybe outline a little of the main problems in relation to Telephone Surveillance technologies, but if I think of or find any major points that I think I could contribute to your section, i'll let you know. MLCRooney (discuss • contribs) 16:24, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys I hope it is alright that in the section of Youtube I am writing about that I referenced your CCTV section as I think there is a good link there. Let me know if you agree? User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I tried to put ANPR in a subsection under CCTV, but instead it ended up as its own section below it. If anyone could tell me what I did wrong/help me move it that'd be great (although as it works fine as the stand-alone section it is already, do you think I need to change it at all? It is about cameras still after all) Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 15:58, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Ethical Concerns
Hi! Was just wondering who started this section on the main page, I'd like to help out as I think I can add in an interesting case study. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 14:45, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

@Thedellboy, it was me again, but didn't know what else to write. A case you be great there (Y) Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 10:04, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Thedellboy mind if I join in? I saw on the table above that there is no second name for this section --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 12:55, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia Sure thing, I'm not sure what else to write since my case study so if you've got any ideas let me know. I'll probably come back to it in a few days, I feel like I need to return to my Surveillance Technologies section. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 14:30, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Thedellboy I see you have used facebook messenger as a case study and I completely agree with its relevance to the topic. Perhaps though you could mention in the introduction or conclusion to it the fact that this situation happens nowadays with most of the social media apps we use on a daily basis, especially as it is a known fact (research might be needed for evidence here) that not only do people agree to terms without even reading them and not only do apps then collect enourmous data banks on the user, but institutions themselves (eg. the government) access the conversations and personal data, filtering them "for matters of security". Of course this is not always true as from what the public is given knowledge of not every government controls everything and not every text is checked but when it happens it is a matter of surveillance. Could it be on the one hand an example of 'positive' surveillance, in the best interest of the community and for safety reasons? Or is it more leaning towards being privacy infringement and control over the population? It is a broad topic and can be tackled from different perspectives, this link might be interesting for a more general approach to identity http://www.capurro.de/onres.htm for example debating the principle of informed consent and the exposure of the human being online. From it, I would like to quote a passage, just to give you a highlight of how this might be used in this subtopic: "But what, then, about online trust? The basic ethical challenge concerns the tension between freedom and surveillance. As in the case of censorship in the printing epoch, the state aims at protecting citizens from what is supposed to be harmful to them. Netizens are aware of new kinds of state control. While cryptography is a main instrument for protecting online freedom in that it enforces privacy where no convention or legal means can guarantee it, the typical ‘netiquette’ attitude also contains elements of openness, sharing, and helpfulness towards the ‘newbies’. Online communication researchers may consider one of their greatest ethical challenges to be the creation of an atmosphere of collaboration and mutual support as propagated, for example, by the open source movement, which quite naturally implies sharing some of the results with the people who were subjected to the research." Exploring more generally the system, it could also be mentioned perhaps what came up in today's lecture, with digital labour having a good exploitation potential. Where by using some apps and pages, for example, we are benefitting someone else more than ourselves and where labour is extremely cheap in a Mechanical Turk system (while it pays and therefore benefits the requester of the HIT). Not to forget the value data in itself has, allowing systems/corporations like Google and Amazon to become megastructures, databanks with significant relevance, as if a virtual empire that could challenge more physical ones (oil companies, car factories eccetera). Databanks built on the "consent" (often though unaware?) of the user. Again relating back to the lecture, and linking back to your case study, the experiment that facebook was able to run "experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks" without the users even being aware of it -until later on- challenges, in my opinion, the ethics of the app, underlining once again the fragility of the user, the exposure that allows a relatively easy manipulation. Let me know what you think and if we could perhaps work together to add this info to the section! --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:47, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia Hi Giulia, sorry I would have replied earlier but was having trouble accessing Wikibooks. Thanks for the detailed response. It seems like you have done quite a good level of research into this topic, and I honestly think that everything you've mentioned is solid. It really builds well around the case study I have written. I definitley think it is a good idea to add this into the Ethical Concerns section of the Wikibook. You have a solid grasp of what you are talkng about and some references, so I would say go ahead and add it into my section. Keep mine the same if you can, I would suggest adding in what you've written before and after the case, and once its all done that will make a really good section that flows well, talking about theories and ethical concerns with a case study at the heart of it to draw on as an example. Let me know what you think of this Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 16:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Thedellboy, don't worry I would not even dare to modify without permission what you have written. I will try get it done as soon as possible and am inviting you to the revisit it and fix it to your liking. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 18:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Thedellboy I have added writing just after your intro section and a little segment at the end, the text that was already there has not been changed. (I hope the link works) --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 20:35, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia Hey Giulia, great job! I read through it and I'm really happy with it, your bit links really well into mine. I think i is a really solid seciton!

@Thedellboy glad it worked well. I read over the entire section to make sure it read ok and made some minor changes in the wording of some bits I had added in. Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Laws for surveillance
Hello everyone, @ user:mausjjudith and me would like to cover the aspect of existing laws, who restrict or enable surveillance and sousveillance if that's ok for everybody? --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 14:25, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys, was just looking over the whole Wikibook and I see you guys have lined out your different sections, which is good, but you have links to empty wikibooks which come up in red saying that the page does not exist! Just thought I'd give you a heads up, I'm not too sure what it is either. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 14:29, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

, hey I am wondering too, since wether Judith nor me wrote this text. And I am kind of confused since we put lots of effort in our research and now someone else uploaded a text--Handkel (discuss • contribs) 09:02, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

I think that you could put your first point of 'laws and restrictions' under the subtopic 'objectives of surveillance' because you didn't explain any laws and restrictions. We will add some information there and complete the other aspects. Mausjjudith (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, looks like somebody fixed that link thing for you on your section. It sucks that someone else put in stuff, its important that we all try and keep to our own sections by using the table that was set out and asking other groups before adding information. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 13:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

yes i fixed it myself. We now just added other significant information that was missing, because somehow the guy who uploaded stuff there just quoted Wikipedia pages. But thanks for letting us know :)!--Handkel (discuss • contribs) 13:50, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Power politics of a Networked culture
Hi everyone, this topic seems quite interesting to research more, does who ever put it up have any objections if I look into it further? It would be interesting to research sousveillance in groups like Anonymous and Wikileaks and how that conflicts with the surveillance of the NSA --Idkun (discuss • contribs) 17:21, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Idkun, I put it up.I would be happy to have your contribution to this topic. No objections as the goal is to make our page as Kick-ass as possible. so feel free to add or make any suggestions.Thank you Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 11:16, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Idkun I am also looking into the hacking community and especially those hacktivists who try to bring out security leaks, cover-ups or conspiracies. Anonymous and Wikileaks are definitely in my study but you may start putting material first as I will not be working on this for the next 5 hours or so.Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Idkun Pamela.nx are you still interested in the Wikileaks & Anonymous part? I am writing something and I would find your contributions really helpful. Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 17:21, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi yes I am researching this and looking at the implications of sousveillance in social media vs surveillance. I think it would be good to mention how it is so much easier for people to organise online in terms of accessibility however this is still monitored by agencies like the NSA or in cases like the PRC where the only content available for people online is approved by the government. What do you guys think? --Idkun (discuss • contribs) 13:08, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys just a reminder that this is still my topic and I am being limited in some ways if you completely take over the section especially without consulting me on what it is you are going to add because in some ways it could be similar to what I was going to add. Just a little reminder to contribute but be inclusive and engaging with what you are adding.IdkunSrepanisPamela.nx (discuss • contribs)

No one has taken over anything, we have been suggesting what to add to the section. I don't know what you are wanting to add in either so perhaps if you could be more inclusive and engaging with what it is you are wanting to do then we can work around it. That way we are not covering the same ground. (also not sure which user it was who wrote this but assuming it's Pamela.nx)

yeah, it was me, sorry it just seemed like I wasn't being tagged in some of the convos about the topic but must have been my own misunderstanding.Hope everyone is getting on well with the project. all the best for tomorrow!Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 18:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Youtube: Surveillance or Sousveillance?
Just kicking off this particular section and getting it ready for the future contribs. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 14:56, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

am a bit late in the discussion section but would like to contribute to this topic, if possible --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 12:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, yeah I would be happy with you commenting on this section. Good luck. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 19:23, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

http://nms.sagepub.com/content/17/5/755.short <- maybe you could use this as a case study? This event could be an example of how on youtube it is possible to create an environment of sousveillance-related information (divulge the news indipendently) but at the same time how this same information might be related to the main source of mass media and therefore not really leave the surveillance area. Hope you understand what I'm driving at. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 22:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Usually very convenient but in this case not so much, it is easy to access videos on youtube even from google search but...hit a wall when it comes to looking for info on youtube itself. Anyways, I then decided to look for the uses of youtube, because why not something useful might have come up. And perhaps it did, but I will leave such judgment to you (feel free to tell me that I'm completely off road if what I am coming across is not useful for your section). Basically when it comes to the distinction between surveillance and sousveillance in youtube, it might be good to consider its basic function: sharing videos. Sharing videos means sharing both information and data. In this, and seeing the results that came up when looking for the uses, the mere fact of an individual (youtuber/vlogger) uploading videos -no matter what their contents- can be considered sousveillance. Considering the freedom of "speech" (information shared), the fact that viewing is free and that contents is uploaded by an individual (not necessarily paid by someone) for an audience to see (and this audience is not forced to see it). At the same time though, there is a counterpart when analysing youtube in more depth. Especially with years passing. Elements that can make it possible to reinforce the idea that youtube oscillates in the surveillance area begin with Google buying Youtube from its original creators, to add it to a list of interlinked functions that claim to make the internet experience easier and more complete (while collecting personal information from the users from a range of accounts... like gmail and the youtube profile). Further surveillance might derive from the fact that youtube, like facbook, does not work randomly and videos do not really come up by chance (to some extent) - there is in fact control. Videos automatically upload based on contents/author of the previously watched one; videos can be censored, taken down from the website and restricted to some areas only (internet safety though?) making the freedom of spreading contents somewhat limited; videos appear on the homepage based on previously searched (data from user) and depending whom they are from (trending videos; an example could be youtube rewind videos, which pop up everywhere when just released as they are made "directly" by youtube as a cooperative project); although viewing videos has been free from the beginning, advertisement has become a main feature of it (users exposed to ads before the video) and some films are now available only with payment (does this not go against the initial intention of the website?). Adding to this, the fact that businesses (and institutions) can use it as much as independent users, makes it even more difficult to understand where and how deep to draw the line between surveillance and sousveillance. I will conclude this by linking a page that might be useful (it has some statistical data collected by youtube itself) https://www.youtube.com/yt/press/statistics.html --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 00:36, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey sorry for replying so late, I have been so caught up with writing the Youtube section I have not had the proper time to give this the look over it deserves. Have you thought about/done this section yourself in the book? User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 13:38, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I love this section. Your points are backed up well with your evidence also you have a wide variety of you tubers mentioned which give it more depth. You have done well to maintain this section and keep it interesting. Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 14:27, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I'm glad I have kept it interesting and have not just scratched the surface of the topic. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 14:33, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

You have gone into depth really well. For such a hard topic you managed to give a great argument for your point. Sousveillance was also something really tricky to pinpoint so the fact you have done it so well greatly shows how much you thought about this. Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 14:36, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Humanity Vs Surveillance
Same again just kicking off this section for future contribs. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 14:58, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I was hoping to talk about Britain's Big Brother culture and whether it has more benefits than problems for society, would that be okay for this sub topic? NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 22:20, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, yeah that sounds like it would fit well with what is planned for this section so go for it. It can only broaden the sub topic. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 22:35, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, this is an absolute minefield in terms of getting stuck in as I don't want to tread on anyones toes. I'm just trying to find a good place to start contributing so thanks very much. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 22:45, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I can definitely identify with feeling lost on here, one of my friends is going to also be contributing to this section as she thought it up but you two should be able to bounce off each other quite well with ideas and debates. I hope it goes well for you. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 22:57, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm adding in the arguments for HRA 1998 and Data Protection on the humanity side as well as the use of Automatic Facial Recognition. Later I'll add in about the Surveillance argument so that we have a more balanced argument as it's looking very "pro against" at the moment. It has taken a while for me to post this as it's not saving properly so I'm going to check the Teahouse and see if there's a problem - it's not an edit clash, I already checked. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 15:13, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I would definitely be interested in doing a case study on the ethical issues of surveillance. Again, I don't want to tread on anyones toes! I sort of wanted to discuss surveillance by discussing George Orwell and Jeremy bentham, but I don't want to stretch too far away from the topic. Would just be interesting to tie in the Big Brother discussion with George Orwell and his work. let me know what you guys think. Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 15:36, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Justalex 28 A case on ethical issues would be great! I have a really good quote from George Orwell with a source/reference that can be added in once you put in the case study. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 20:51, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Justalex 28 sorry to intrude but would that (ethical issues) not fall under the subtopic of "ethical concerns"? --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 22:50, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Juliabutgiulia Sorry, bad choice of wording! I just noticed the post about Big Brother culture and thought it would be pretty cool to add in some sort of reference to George Orwell since he deals with similar issues. But then I suppose that might fit under ethical concerns better than this section Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 19:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, hello, hey. I am currently writing up the Humanity argument of Humanity vs surveillance so just heads up to leave that alone(minus Noragrets who hit me up on the big brother effect)also who is doing the Surveillance technologies because I'd like to work with you on SocialNetwork analysis. THANKYOU. User: Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 14:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hey, if you scroll up to the discussion section on surveillance technologies you could comment in there if you are wanting to work on the surveillance technologies section. It will probably be fine Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 16:17, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey I have referenced your section on Humanity Vs Surveillance in the section on Youtube if that's alright? They seemed to fit quite well, give it a read and see of you agree. If not I will remove it. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 12:51, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Thats okay great job! Keep it in! :) You did a great job on that section thank you for bringing it to life!! Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 12:57, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for understanding and I'm glad, I have really enjoyed writing that section that interested me. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 13:41, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I really like this section you have started and maintained. I particularly like the wide variety of examples that you have looked at in depth like the Paris bombings, Bulger abduction and Surveillance apps and to how they have furthered your case. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 14:22, 11 March 2016 (UTC) I've finished the argument for both sides and added a conclusion if someone has the time to last minute checks of spelling and grammar because admit idly I'm not great and they are my weakest links. Thank you. Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 14:24, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I'm glad you thought I had a varied argument, I was hoping that my examples would come through as relevant and also help back up the points I was making. Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 14:27, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

You're very welcome, okay I will give it a look over and try my best but I am not the best either at grammar or spelling. User: The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 14:28, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! If you need anything done on your section or help understanding the points on my section let me know!! Thegirlwiththebluehair (discuss • contribs) 14:32, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Data mining and profiling
Hi, I'm interested in writing about this subtopic for surveillance. Just making sure, is anyone intending or has already researched this topic? If nobody else wants to write about it, i'll just go ahead and cover it. Thanks. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 11:12, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Sousveillance and art?
Hello group, surfing the web and reading through the previous debate posts I came across the question of whether there can be art in sousveillance, or at least a movement emerging from counter-surveillance in which people identify themselves as artists of some sort. I am interested in covering this subtopic but please feel free to add comments --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 14:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Juliabutgiulia Hey this sounds like an interesting area to write on, I will do some research in this area and will hopefully be able to help you out if that's okay. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 19:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Kyra Paterson yeah feel free to comment here and share your ideas, I'm still doing research but will most likely include in my subtopic the artists Tiffany Trenda and Kate Durbin. Although to begin with I think I would like to approach art from a more general view, passing through the digital era before focusing on the mentioned examples. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 21:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay dokey that sounds good Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 21:58, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Juliabutgiulia so I've found an interesting article which talks about using surveillance for politically motivated art...do you think this will be useful to incorporate into this section?Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 20:07, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Kyra Paterson yes probably, mind sending the link? --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 20:59, 9 March 2016

Juliabutgiulia you should be able to access it here. The section on surveillance art as a political movement is discussed towards the end of the article Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 21:28, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Kyra Paterson There seems to be a problem with the link, I can't access it. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 21:42, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Juliabutgiulia That's weird okay well the article is called: "Try to walk with the sound of my footsteps" The Surveillant Body, (2008), Kirsty Robertson. Hopefully if you search this it should come up Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 22:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

thank you Kyra Paterson I'll make sure to look it up. In the meantime I have uploaded contents in the section so if you would like to read it and give me feedback, feel free to do so. Constructive comments are appreciated. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 00:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Juliabutgiulia I sent you a message this morning as I think we've come up with something similar although my angle is from Tinder's new idea of having a share button which they already argue people can screen shot anyway and also the case of model Emily Sears who would screen shot messages of men sending her unsociliated penis pictures and threaten to forward them onto girlfriends or families to 'out' them. Does this sound too similar to yours and if you want to combine it into your section. Like I said in my message, I'm a bit behind with the project so found it difficult to see what has been covered and what hasn't. Anyway let me know. Thanks HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 10:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey I've read the sousveillance as art section and you have composed a really good article. I don't have any constructive comments really... Although I was thinking that maybe there should be a separate section under the surveillance part of this chapter. But that would only be if you wanted to split up sousveillance and surveillance art so it' not really a big deal. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 16:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Kyra Paterson... I am not 100% sure of the structure yet as I thought I would use surveillance to introduce sousveillance. I will work on it more and see if I can expand the section on sousveillance so that it gets through as the main topic... the reason why I placed them together was in fact to show contrast between the two, and as there is a very thin line in which they often mix for artistic purposes, it seemed like keeping it more flowing. I might be wrong though. I will revisit the whole section anyway, and have yet to add links. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 18:23, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

HayleyJo87 here I am. Basically, from what I understand you are writing on Tinder's feature. Although I did mention capturing screenshots of conversations in my article, I intended it as an example of an artist's work, and as I was trying to relate sousveillance to art, I was not taking into account the topic that you are exploring. As in, although they are similar (regarding the screenshotting) there seems to be a different purpose between your angle and mine, as yours comes across as more ethically/socially based and less artistic. On the other hand, I was trying to convey examples of modern art in the digital era, through sousveillance. I might not have done that well though, which is why I am going to revisit the entry in the next few hours. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 18:31, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia Sorry I hope I haven't put you off. It was just my paranoia acting up. I was more concerned that you might have thought I was copying you. I did email Greg just in case and he said this 'Hi Hayley – in these cases, it’s probably a really good idea to put an internal wiki link in your section to the other user’s section. The markup is something like book/chapter/other section. In fact, getting your team to last-minute scour the entire book for content that relates to your own chapter page and making these links would be really useful in tying things together. These little things can make a big difference'. Sorry if it seemed like I was being impatient, that wasn't my intention, I was just concerned because I was such a late starter that I wouldn't end up with enough time. Glad we got it sorted. :) HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 18:59, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

HayleyJo87 Don't worry you didn't put me off or come across as impatient. I understand your concern and actually think it was very good of you to check with me regarding the doubt you had. I hope it is solved now, as in it isn't a situation of you copying me. There might be a similar element but the cases, uses and purposes are different! Probably good though to do as Greg suggested. Honestly don't worry about it and for any future concern do not hesitate to contact me and I will try to be helpful. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 19:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia That's fab thanks :) I might leave a belated comment on your 3rd user talk post. I misunderstood part of the brief. You don't have to check it out. It's just a heads up in case you see an unrelated comment from me. Thanks again HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 19:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind but I've added in a little paragraph to this section regarding political motivation through art. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 12:19, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@Kyra Paterson after many dead ends (only abstracts) I was finally able to read the article that you said and it raises many interesting points. Although it focuses on surveillance I am now trying to see how I can incorporate it in the text. I know it would have been better to look at it earlier and discuss it..sorry. Thanks for the heads up though. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 13:26, 11 March 2016 (UTC) sorry, my bad, just read it in the book. All good then, thanks. :) --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 13:54, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Juliabutgiulia No worries i'm glad you found it useful I think the work you have done is really good so it doesn't really need anymore points to back it up. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 15:18, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm just scrolling through our chapter for last minute 'fixes' and was thinking it might be good if you added an image to this section just to break it up a little but I couldn't find a good image that would represent the points being made. It's up to you though as it was just an idea. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 15:27, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I have added other bits so will go through it as well. I would have liked to add pictures but I failed to put in a few of interest due to copyright purposes and my related ignorance. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 15:52, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Surveillance in Popular Culture
Hey I just made a section for this if anyone wants to help me with it feel free Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 15:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Petrichorblue as the deadline is tomorrow and there's nothing on the book itself yet for this topic, thought I'd check if things are coming along ok and if help is needed. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 20:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia I have a couple of things I'm just about to put up, but since 'in popular culture' sections are about examples, the more the merrier in terms of adding to it Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 23:55, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@User:Petrichorblue Think this is a really interesting to cover, would it be okay if I included a section about paparazzi and how this can effect how famous role models? Let me know what you think Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 14:41, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@User:Justalex 28 Yeah totally! Go for it! That sounds like a really interesting addition to the section Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 15:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@User:Pertichorblue Great! I have added in a small point about paparazzi. I also added a little extra on to the 1984 section as I loved this idea. I have linked the point about surveillance in the novel to the idea of power. It links back nicely to modern society and raises the argument that surveillance is not in place for safety, but more about control. Let me know what you think of this and if youre happy with it. Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 15:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@User:Justalex 28 Yeah your addition went into a lot more depth and was really helpful. 1984 is the most important point on the list, so it's good that we go into as much detail as possible on it Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 15:43, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

was having a read through your section, hope you don't mind I corrected a typo. Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:15, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@User:Juliabutgiulia Thank you!

I was trying to make a last minute addition but for some reason wiki won-t let me, saying that an automated filter has identified this edit as potentially uncostructive and it has been disallowed. ...I don't know why, and it shows fine in the preview, just won't let me save it. Anyways the text would have been this: "In the late 1960s, with the increasing use of surveillance cameras, computers and databases, the idea of becoming immersed in a situation of pervasise surveillance caused concern amongst the population and the development of the situation's portrayal through books and screens. In 1971, The Anderson Tapes presents a group of burglars using a security camera system to surveil and execute their coup of a luxury apartment building, while being completely unaware of being themselves surveilled by others. In the same year, George Lucas directed THX 1138, in which the futuristic scenario features a total control over society by computers, surveillance cameras and android police officers. From that time period though, it can be debated that the most classic surveillance movie is from Francis Ford Coppola: The Conversation. In this film, the central characterr has a remarkable ambivalent role, where he is a leading audio surveillance expert but at the same time fails to understand the meaning of his own recordings, falling therefore in a net of surveillance and deception. " --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:40, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Your only links are to Wikipedia so it should be fine. Go for it Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 16:46, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

@Srepanis it does not allow me to save the changes. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:49, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Aerial surveillance
Hi guys, I'm going to add some content for aerial surveillance which will involve the ethical dilemmas in using technology such as drones. If anyone is interested in contributing to this area of surveillance or has already done research for it give me a heads up so there is no repeated content or wasted time. Our chapter is looking great so far. Thanks! NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 16:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi NoRagrets9, it seems like an interesting part you're working on, I'll try to look for some additional information. I agree, after a rough start, I think page is finally looking good! --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 18:03, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey Evp09 I think so too, not sure if I have quite expanded enough on aerial surveillance as I mainly focused on drones, so if you want to add a different perspective or angle please feel free! NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 18:57, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

NoRagrets9 You've added a lot of information on this topic already. Well done! I'll see if I have time to look for new perspectives to add. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 19:01, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Citizen Journalism
Does anybody have anymore criticisms to add in? It looks a little short so could do with one or two more (I can't think of/find any though..!) Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 13:01, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Digitalkitty I've started adding quite a few things on this subject as I think it is an extremely interesting one, I've expanded it out a bit into examples of Citizen Journalism which include Ferguson, Missouri and the idea of Edmund Burke's fourth estate and the fifth estate. Journalism is my joint degree so this is something I really enjoyed writing, considering that a lot of stuff has already been written on. Any ideas of stuff that I could do to further on this subject? GlasgowTexan (discuss • contribs) 15:59, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

I've added a bit about the Black Lives Matter campaign and checked the spelling and syntax for this section! ItsMartholomew (discuss • contribs) 16:48, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Wiki What?!
Thought it would be nice to have an area where we can discuss in our groups as well and better plan what we're working on together. Elizabeth and I are working on Surveillance Technologies together. I am also doing ethical concerns and added in a case study, so if someone else from the group wants to help out with that, that would be awesome. Do we want to consider meeting up to have a study session or something and bounce around ideas? I just wanna make sure there is some group collaboration involved as I am not entirely certain on how the Wikibook Groups are assessed, as there seems to be a lot of free for all in topics (which isn't really that bad of a thing) but some group work would do no harm. Cheers Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 14:26, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I would be very keen to meet up, is anyone free tomorrow afternoon? It would be really helpful if we could go over sections and see what needs to be added! Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 15:28, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm free tomorrow afternoon to meet up, it would be useful to discuss the section within our own group --Idkun (discuss • contribs) 16:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey! I'm also up for meeting and seeing what we can share. Free before 1pm tomorrow and on Thursday. --HoDstripes (discuss • contribs) 21:59, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

After wikibooks being down for a bit its been kinda crazy so I'm not sure if we'll be able to meet up. But I think our group is fairly sorted with what we've got set out to do, and Kieran and Matthew will be adding their bits in soon I think. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 16:19, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Does anyone have ideas for extra sections, I'm currently touching up and reformatting the Citizen Journalism section that one of the other groups started, it was lacking a lot of information on the subject so I've added more examples of it and reformatted the criticism of it as an industry. Know I'm a tad late to the discussion, I've been super busy with stuff lately and internet has been a bit iffy for the past few weeks. GlasgowTexan (discuss • contribs) 16:06, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Undatables
Hey how is everyone from the Undateabes getting on? I've been doing some work on public reactions to sousveillance what is everyone else working on? Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 19:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I am currently working on the Citizen Journalism section, mainly adding more specific details and references. Then I'm going to look at Humanity vs Surveillance - I wrote so much on it earlier but the server was down (so they said on Teahouse earlier) that I needed some time away from it..! I want to add more in for Sousveillance because I feel our group has been fairly one-sided in the sense that we have loads to write on Surveillance - I'm just not all too sure about what to do for it. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 21:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay dokey yeah I was also thinking that so I've mostly been researching topics on sousveillance so shall be adding in some info into the sousveillance sections Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 22:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys, I've been working on the aspect of laws and restrictions, together with Judith. Since we're non native speakers, would someone of you mind to have a quick look at the grammar and the spelling? If you are looking at humanity and surveillance you may also have a look on the Protection of Freedom act, I'm not really sure if that can help you, but could be an interesting point to see if the freedom and therefore the humanity aspect suffers under surveillance? and yes, maybe we should have a look on the sousveillance point of view, does anyone have any ideas? --Handkel (discuss • contribs) 15:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Handkel Hey I've had a quick look over the laws and restrictions and everything seems to look good. I am planning on adding some information on the section of sousveillance as an art Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 16:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much I appreciate that! If you need any help, just let me know! I still think that I need to extent the aspects of the Telecommunication act and then I'm still trying to figure out what to add to sousveillance. Besides, do you guys know if we get marked individually or as a group? And if I want to upload a picture to a text, what do I have to do if someone owns the copyright? Do I just have to insert the link for the site I got it from? -Handkel (discuss • contribs) 17:04, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Handkel Okay dokey I can help out if you want as I'll be adding to the chapter until the deadline and I am not sure but think it may possibly be individual marks and i'm also not sure on uploading images but I think it should be okay if you have a link to the site. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 11:39, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, I asked in the subpage ,, useful tipps´´ and someone explained how it works with the pictures, if someone of you still needs that information ! -Handkel (discuss • contribs) 12:59, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay that's great thanks that will be useful as i'm going to upload some images. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 13:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I worked on 'Laws and restrictions' and wanted to do the definitions of surveillance and sousveillance, but since someone else did that I don't know what to add anymore, because I think most of the aspects are already done. Mausjjudith (discuss • contribs) 14:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Mausjjudith Hey I've just been going through each section to see if I can add in anything extra but I don't think there is anything else we can do as most sections already have the information they need. Kyra Paterson (discuss • contribs) 15:22, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey guys, since there is nothing else to contribute content wise, we could just quickly check our text for Spelling and grammar mistakes and then add that to the specific table, which is concerning the proofreading aspect ? -Handkel (discuss • contribs) 16:26, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

KESAP
Hey guys! How's everyone getting on? Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 21:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi team! After Wikibooks was down for a bit today (please tell me, it wasn't just my computer?), I'm back on editing again. How are your sections looking? Do you need help with finding information on anything? --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 18:00, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi guys, I need more information on the politics involved with surveillance and social media.Evp09,otherwise I think everything is going well. do you mind saying which topics belong to you just to see how far our group has gone. Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 18:54, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Pamela.nx, unfortunately, I don't have anything additional on that topic. I'm currently working on the 'Laws and Restrictions' section, but I'd like to add a new section on privacy and terms of use statements for companies. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 18:58, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Evp09,that sounds like a good topic to add,it would be great if you did.Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 19:08, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

If you guys could help with the list of examples in 'Surveillance in Popular Culture' that'd be swell. I have a couple more to add still, but I'm sure it would look better if the list was longer Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 00:41, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Petrichorblue I added two more the 1980's show COPS that sort of started reality television and gogglebox.Hope that helps.Good luck! Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 01:28, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi your diagram is interesting but not very clear would you like to upload a bigger version of it? Here is a link to it https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3O5KLwduqdqeGhob2N1STk5cmc/view?usp=sharing Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 11:13, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for letting me know. I've now edited the photo and added the updated version to the page. --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 14:34, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Pamela.nx Thank you so much for the help! Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 13:35, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Half an hour to go! Anyone need any last minute help with anything? Petrichorblue (discuss • contribs) 16:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Look Around You
Gvg00001 Kellysun960601 NoRagrets9 CITOYEN__LUC hey guys, time is ticking but I am quite sure you are all on track...or am I wrong? If so please feel free to ask for help! Thank you again for the interaction so far, every small piece placed counts in the creation of the bigger picture :) ...Is there anything you would like to discuss in particular? After being a bit here and a bit there, I am now going to concentrate a bit more on my subtopic, what are you guys working on? --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 01:16, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Gvg00001 Kellysun960601 CITOYEN__LUC Juliabutgiulia Hey, everything seems to be on track for me, is everyone else doing alright? At the moment I've contributed to the humanity vs surveillance concept and wrote about data mining and profiling. At this point I think I'm going to add a bit for aerial surveillance and go into further detail about drones and its ethics. If anyone is interested in adding to this subtopic give me a shout. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 15:59, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Guys, you are great! I was just thinking about a section like this and even posted a message to all of you, now i come here and see it! Great stuff! Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs)

Gvg00001 NoRagrets9 CITOYEN__LUC Juliabutgiulia Hey guys, I've been mainly working on the "types of surveillance", "Power politics of a Networked culture" and "Citizen Journalism", also add few information/my own opinion to the other sections, not too much though. As I'm not the native speaker, would any of you guys like to have a quick look at these sections to help me check the grammar or spelling mistakes? If you have any ideas about what should be added to these sections just let me know :D   Kellysun960601 (discuss • contribs) 21:19, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Gvg00001 CITOYEN__LUC Juliabutgiulia Kellysun960601  Hi Kellysun960601 I'd be happy to take a look and I'll let you know if there is anything missing. If there are small grammatical errors would you like me to just go ahead and correct them? I'm sure it'll all be fine anyway! NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 21:43, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to proof-read each other's work yes. I apologise for not having posted anything on the book itself yet but am hoping to do so very soon. I am not a native speaker either but I am trying my best and would be happy to help where needed even in the correction of things. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 22:04, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey NoRagrets9! Thanks for that and yeah just feel free to correct or add anything to the sections. I agree with you Juliabutgiulia, it would be quite helpful to do the proofreading for each other's work! I'm sure we'll make it brilliant! Kellysun960601 (discuss • contribs) 22:40, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

I finally had the time to upload the subtopic's contents. As it stands though I have not included links or references but I feel like I should, what do yous think? --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 23:13, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Guys jumping to your nice discussion to tell you that there is an issue with some of the images posted earlier due to the copyright rules of Wikipedia. A few have been taken down and there is one pending uploaded by. I am working on how to solve this and I'll get to you soon.Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 23:52, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Srepanis I uploaded the image with the upload wizard page which hopefully means it will be okay to keep as I didn't claim copyright or creative licensing for the image. If not it is not essential as long as the content is still there. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 00:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia: I think it would be better if you add some links or reference to the contents you post. Kellysun960601 (discuss • contribs) 00:29, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

After wikibooks being down for a bit its been kinda crazy so I'm not sure if we'll be able to meet up. But I think our group is fairly sorted with what we've got set out to do, and Kieran and Matthew will be adding their bits in soon I think. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 16:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

If you want to add a new picture of a drone here is a link that leads to a picture that has a Some Rights Reserved mark on the right so it would be fine https://www.flickr.com/photos/69214385@N04/8725078749. Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 16:46, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Srepanis Thanks very much for the help, I'll use one from there NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 17:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

@Gvg00001 @Kellysun960601 @NoRagrets9 @CITOYEN__LUC last night I kind of tried and kind of failed to add some pictures to that chunk of text of mine.. I was thinking it might have been good to have some pictures to reinforce the points and well, isn't it a bit ironic that there is no visual art in the subtopic about art? But I wasn't successful at it so don't know, perhaps better let it go? ...uff. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 13:23, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Useful tips
Hey guys! I'd like to add just few quick tips on Wiki mark-up language that we could use:
 * 1) To discuss we should add , so that everyone gets a notification.
 * 2) Links to external websites are made with one bracket on each side like [external link]. These are used in the External links section of an article.
 * 3) Images are added with  IMAGENAME . The "thumb" part is just a size and should be left in. The best place to get images from is Wiki Commons!!! The easiest thing to do is go on Wiki Commons, find a picture and then choose the option to get a link from the type described above for the chosen image.
 * 4) Reference section: References should appear at the end of the page. Make a level 2 header: . Then place  below the header. You don't have to type out the references there; instead, place them inside the article after the sentence they support. They'll appear automatically.
 * 5) Creating unordered list is done by adding a * for an item and ** or more for sub-items.
 * 6) Creating ordered list is done by adding a # for an item and ## or more for sub-items/
 * 7) For Italic we can put '' before and after the word/line/phrase.
 * 8) For Bold we can put ''' before and after the word/line/phrase.

Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 17:46, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


 * This is really helpful, I was about to comment asking how referencing works but this has explained it perfectly. Thanks. Thedellboy (discuss • contribs) 14:18, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, Im glad it worked for you! It's time we really start working lol :) Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 14:32, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the tipps! They really helped me while writing on the topics, I just got one question. Do you know how to handle it when someone/or the site, owns the Copyright for a picture? Do I just have to link the site? Thanks in advance! -Handkel (discuss • contribs) 17:07, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, so to upload pictures that do not exist on the Commons of Wikipedia you better do a search on Google for material that has no rights. Type your word and then click Search Tools>Usage tools> Labelled for noncommercial use The other way is to go here and search for images that have the signs accepted on Wikipedia as shown on the right side under the date. Here you can see the acceptable signs https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Flickr_files Srepanis (discuss • contribs) 19:22, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I am going to try it this way, thanks for your help! I appreciate that! -Handkel (discuss • contribs) 09:58, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hey thank you so much for putting this section up, it has been really helpful for when I needed to either ref a website or put a ref at the bottom. It saved a lot of hassle having it readily available here. User The one behind the pillar (discuss • contribs) 13:36, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Questions
Hey guys just a quick question- does anyone know why I might be getting red links/page does not exist when I attempt to link a wikipedia page? They are all legitimate pages and I can't figure out how to link them properly as I thought I was following the steps correctly. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 16:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm not qualified to answer you here, as I'm from another group (sorry for snooping around), but have you included a "W:" before your link? How you link to in WikiBooks probably looks something like this: Random Page . Instead, for Wikipedia articles, you need to let WikiBooks know by including a little W: in front of your link, i.e. Random Page, or Random Page . Hope this helps!! Chickpeanut (discuss • contribs) 21:19, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh my god such a small thing I have missed has made every link I tried invalid thank you so much. NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 21:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi,thanks for putting up all the helpful tips,however I am having trouble with images.I tried the wiki commons method that you suggested but the picture was far to big.Do you know how I can crop the picture or is there an easier way to attach images? Pamela.nx (discuss • contribs) 16:19, 11 March 2016 (UTC)