Talk:Debates in Digital Culture 2019/Online Communities

This page is your Essay Discussion Page. It is where you will document planning, logistics, decision-making, delegation of tasks, reading annotations, and so on for your Collaborative Essay class project. Please think carefully about how you will manage and organise this page. Don't forget to keep logged in when contributing to the discussion, and sign each contrib with the four tildes (~) markup. This will form the basis for a good chunk of available marks for this project, so please do contribute regularly and consistently. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 13:26, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Discussion
Working essay organisation: Positive and Negative impacts of different types of online communities. (feel free to edit this if it changes/evolves) Mmm00044 (discuss • contribs) 16:30, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Outcome of discussion: In response to, we have decided to choose 3 overall types of online communities and then assign people who are going to do positive and negatives of each of these communities. As there is 12 of us over all, we will have 4 people working on each section, 2 for positives and 2 for negatives. More will be added to this discussion to clarify further. Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 16:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Week Beginning 11th March
Ok important updates for everyone! First of all, we removed a lot of stuff we don't really need anymore because the page was getting very cumbersome. If at any point anyone cannot remember something we decided on please don't hesitate to ask again, we couldn't quite decide how to best alter the page. This is what has happened content wise through our meeting today, any issues, disagreements, etc please please please let us know, because we understand that the more specific path we took changes things a lot. We do believe as of right now that this will improve the coherency of our essay though. So our idea right now is to divide the essay into two main sections with three subsections that make up the main communities young adults use (that are the same between the two main sections). Our focus as we've previously discussed will be on the impacts of online communities, giving us the two main sections, positives and negatives. These can be easily discussed (we have already kind of started doing that in our topics) by three main communities; Franchise Communities, Interest Communities, and Personal Communities. So hypothetically, we would have two people researching and writing about each of these six sections. Once this is divided, each pair would need to communicate every time they take a specific focus within their section to make sure there is not a lot of overlap (there is bound to be a bit of overlap, this should not be a problem and I think will in fact make it easier to transition between each of our pieces). As of right now, is researching negative impacts of personal communities (ie social media platforms; platforms where your profile is your identity sharing personal information about yourself). is doing negative impacts of franchise communities (ie redbubble, etsy, etc selling fanart and such). and are researching positives to interest communities (ie fandoms and other topic/interest specific forums). is researching negatives of interest communities (ie toxic fandoms, hierarchies). I am researching the positive impacts of personal communities. At this point that leaves things as is listed in main concepts section. If the topic you have already chosen might fit in one of these sections post in the discussion for us to figure out assignments. Also, there is a possibility of having slightly uneven distribution due to slightly less indepth communities (we think franchise communities may only need one person to do positives and one person to do negatives?) so there could possibly be three people working on one of these sections with no problem. Everything will just come down to communication within group members in each section. Again, we realise that this changes the specifics of our essay a lot but we all agreed during the meeting that we had a lot of things that fit under one topic and everything else was related to online communities in general, but not to any specific question, thesis, argument, etc. This way we will be focused on impacts of online communities as well as addressing what some of the most common ways that young adults interact with each other online actually are. This is a lot to process so if everyone can respond with their thoughts as soon as possible that would be absolutely amazing so we know we are on the right track to a single, cohesive essay. Thank you so so much for your patience and for getting to the end of this explanation! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 17:18, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I think smart mobs might fit into positives of interest communities so maybe you could be the third person on that if that's how we decide to divide it? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 17:28, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, the research I had started so far for social mobs was kinda more leaning towards it being a bad thing rather than a good thing. It does have positives as well though it isn't really something I could say "THIS IS A POSITIVE THING" or "THIS IS A NEGATIVE THING" without leaving out a whole portion of information about what a social mob actually is. So I dont know where I could write it in this new layout thats been decided. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 22:16, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah ok ok, that was a mistake on my part I left out something important; the way we have it divided just now is more for the sake of dividing things with little to no overlap for research and maintaining a focus, we had discussed that the format might have to change for the sake of complete arguments. So I still think your topic would be fine, it just may end up being somewhat a section of its own within interest communities? If your research ends up leaning heavily in one direction it could probably go into the negatives with some counterpoints about positives so it can be fully explained. Honestly we kind of figure people will find both positives and negatives no matter what they look into and if there is something really important they would like to have included we can just work on merging it into the complimentary section anyway, this is just so people have a main focus to discuss that we know is specific enough to maintain a focus. Obviously until we have everything we won't be certain how to format it, but as of right now, I would say we could put social mobs as a negative aspect of interest communities (or personal communities, or maybe personal communities depending on your research) and then we can decide later how to properly arrange the information. In the end it might be easier to give the positives and negatives of each community rather than the positives of all three and then the negatives of all three; if we do it that way it might be easier to flow from the positives and negatives of your topic. But until we figure that out would you be ok with taking negatives of interest communities? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 11:48, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


 * My research looks like it will mostly lean towards the negative side so that is fine for now. I'll try to start writing up some of my research later on and then see how it all looks. I'm worried that some other people who haven't been on the discussion page for a few days are going to feel quite overwhelmed with the changes that have been made and where the topics they had chosen are going to fit into things. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 13:21, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * We're worried about that as well, but that's why we sent messages in the group chat. Unfortunately with the group being as large as it is and everyone not being available at the same time we had to try to make some decisions to move forward with only half of us. It's definitely not an ideal situation, but better to make conclusive changes and decisions with a clear path forward now than realize we haven't sufficiently completed the assignment or made a cohesive single piece right at the end you know? Of course everyone's time matters and everyone's opinions are important, but if people aren't getting back to us we kind of just need to make the best decision for those who are engaging and do what we can. I know it doesn't sound great, but we can't let our essay suffer because people aren't keeping track of the page... I know everyone is very busy and most of us aren't used to maintaining a wikibook, but we need to do our best! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 16:56, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Also, because we've narrowed the topic down, we have talked about leaving the introduction for last and having everyone assigned to a specific one of the sections for now? What does everyone think? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 17:33, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

That's fine, at least we have an idea and a focus of what we are going to do now. That way people can properly get started with their research now that we have a thesis statement.Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 17:52, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

I think that we will probably find that there will be both positive and negative aspects mentioned in some readings we do, if that's the case we could probably just flag that reading up to whoever is researching the other side of whatever you're looking at, whether that's by linking it in the annotated bibliography table or just copying the relevant part of the source for them and @ing them on here SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 11:53, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

I just added myself to one of these positive affects sections since the reading I had done so far related somewhat to that SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry I just moved your comment here for the sake of keeping that section neat, but awesome! Also, yes I think that's a good idea. Obviously in cases like smart mobs which are somewhat more specific than just one side of one of the three communities it might make sense for one person to write about both sides of it, but especially for more general readings that give the impacts of certain kinds of communities I agree with you completely. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 12:05, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Keren and I were looking at Google Scholar and there's a lot of articles we can use for our topic Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 17:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * In addition to this, we have found many articles which are very narrowly focussed on the topic which we are looking at. We have chosen to focus on how there are fandoms within Tumblr and Twitter and the positive effects these websites have. For example, we have found articles labelled: "Tumblr Fandoms, community and culture". Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 17:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry same thing here! Just reposted your comments in the discussion section for the sake of neatness. That's great! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 12:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey, just wanted to ask if there is currently a specific aspect of our section that you are researching? Obviously no worries if the direction changes or if you are not certain what direction you are going in yet, but I figured I should ask while we are still in the somewhat early phases of our essay. As of right now I am looking into social media as a way to connect people socially in spite of geographical boundaries and giving people a voice in society as well as providing possible support. As we have already mentioned, I am sure there will be some overlap in a lot of our work but this is just what I am looking at right now. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 21:13, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I had just been reading more general positives in online communities previously, haven't had the chance to focus on anything specific at the moment. I see you read the same article as me about Facebook though, I thought it was a bit old but still relevant. I had just planned to try and find a bit about the positives of these types of communities to get an idea of how I might come to write about it. That Facebook article went into it pretty well, the ways in which something like Facebook can help people stay in touch with old friends, build relationships with current friends and, to a lesser extent, finding new ones SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 21:32, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome, okay, since we know there is a good chance we'll end up way over the word count it shouldn't be a big deal if some of our work ends up overlapping, so at least for now don't worry about it. If your research ever ends up taking a really specific turn though, just let me know! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 00:46, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Another question for everyone, I completely forgot to mention before that we were talking about focusing on the way young adults interact with these communities for a few reasons; a lot of studies use college students just because they are easily accessible so we thought choosing this demographic shouldn't hinder our ability to find sources, and by narrowing our demographic down we can more easily maintain an argument (just because the way an older demographic interacts online is typically fairly different than others, and the mental impacts on still developing children will likely be different from mostly developed young adults). I don't think this detail is vital to our argument, so if anyone wants to discuss a different demographic, this probably isn't an issue (correct me if I misunderstood what we discussed on Thursday). Just thought I should say something while we are researching in case it might help narrow down the search for anyone. Thoughts? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 21:19, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Currently, as it stands, it seems that I maybe will take on both positive and negitive effects of franchise communities as it is another one that I've found in preliminary research (which I will add into our bibliography as soon as possible) that it isn't easy to say that franchise communities have both positive or a negative effects on a large scale compared to other things that are being researched. Of course this is totally up for change and I'm more than happy just to do negative effects but just at the moment there is a lot of crossover between negative/positive effects of the commnity. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 15:35, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That should work fine! If someone else wants to join franchise communities they could do positives, negatives, or both still and we can just sort through overall information when everyone has done their writings. If nobody else wants to join on that will probably also be fine, as you said it's not quite as large a scale as the others, so we can always have an extra person doing research in any of the other groups as well. Basically so long as we can collectively pull enough information to completely establish our standpoint everything else can be picked through and organized after we have done the initial writing. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 17:43, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Week Beginning 18th March
This is petty but just remember that it's positive/negative effects not affects. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 22:10, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh my gosh, not petty at all thank you for fixing that! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 00:46, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Does anybody know how to prevent the bibliography table from migrating every time we edit it? I just put in a source to the table and it has decided to move to the bottom of the page for no reason despite my edit being on the bibliography section and even taking out the source doesn't fix the issue. Does anybody else have this issue or is it something I'm doing, because it's very frustating to have to recode the table every time it moves sections without reason! Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 11:41, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thats really weird it hasnt done that when I added to it. I'll try fix it. Are you using a laptop or phone or..? CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 13:13, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No, mine did it again too, I was just about to ask about that. This is the same thing that happened last time, we never really figured out how to fix it either just started the table from scratch. I'm on my laptop, for some reason it's jumped down to tips & tricks? I mean at least the table is easy to locate just because it sticks out but it's so frustrating. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 14:29, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm trying to add something to the table now and I can't find how to edit the table! It's at the bottom of the page now under tips and tricks but when I click "edit" for that section I don't see any of the information for the table. Where would I find it? SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 17:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Never mind, fixed it now! The code didn't have an end to the table, so I just added it (It didn't have a |} at the end). If it plays up again there's some details about what should be in wiki table code here SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 17:28, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey guys! Not sure if all of you guys have seen the recent discussion, but if you can all reply with a possible topic that might fit in one of the free areas would be really great! Again, like I said before, if you have a topic you have already been working on we can see if we can fit it in somewhere, and if not we can figure out if we want to include a separate section for it or what we can do to make sure nobody's time or work is wasted. You can see what people are already looking into under the little outline we made under Main Concepts, but obviously that can be altered, it's just what we thought would be easiest to make sure we compile cohesive information. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 19:17, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I've stated my topic as looking into forum-based communities (currently completing a reading about Reddit, and have already done one about parenting forums) so I'm not sure in which category this would fit into. Any help would be appreciated, thanks. Msweeney00 (discuss • contribs) 18:15, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Msweeney00
 * You would definitely be in interest communities then yeah! I also saw your question about whether or not we have to talk about impact, and I think that will be a large portion of our focus, but you are also in one of the more populated sections of the essay, so it will not be lacking in this if your research takes you in a slightly different route. Obviously we'll have to decide later on how to tie everything together, but at this point I personally wouldn't say you need to limit yourself to that! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 23:24, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Mmm00044 (discuss • contribs) 13:40, 19 March 2019 (UTC) I've been looking into the 'negative effects' of online communities and I'm going to focus my research on empathy development and online communities. I'll update the annotated bibliography with what I've covered.

I was thinking that it might be beneficial to have our research done by Monday or Tuesday, that way we have plenty of time to organise and format everything on the main page and we're not scrambling around at the last minute and can put in a full effort. I don't know how other people feel about that deadline, it's just a suggestion. If anybody has any other ideas - feel free to throw them out there. I'm suggesting this for the sake of clarity and to make everything easier for us. Because nobody likes being stressed out at the last minute Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 10:00, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I think that would be a good idea, but maybe to have both research and at least most of your section written? It would give us time to figure everything out on here, and if any of us wanted to meet again in person to figure everything out we would still have a couple of days to do so. If everyone has their sections at least mostly finished though it will mean we will have a few days where we only have to worry about editing, which would be especially useful if we end up deciding we need more information somewhere, or if we are having difficulty getting down to the word count. What does everyone else think? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 13:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Yeah, having research and at least most of the actual piece written would probably be a smarter idea because that way we can start editing sooner rather than later. Especially if we potentially have to cut things out of each section (which is likely to be the case). Otherwise, we do run the risk of leaving too little time for editing and formatting. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 13:50, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

I've added the dates back in again just because I think it helps break the page up a little bit and it's easier on the eye. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 23:11, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Amazing, thank you, I kept forgetting to put them back in. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 18:56, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Would it be possible for all the people who posted extra links to the bottom of the annotated bibliography to either add them into the table or remove them. Simply for the sake of clarity so that we don't just have extra links floating around for no reason, especially if they aren't going to be used in the final product Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 11:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Alright I've removed mine, I have them saved on my own discussion page anyway. I don't want to remove the other person's unless they have theirs saved somewhere else. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 15:06, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Do you think it would be okay if I copy my bibliography that's on my discussion page and put it into the table on here? Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * If it's relevant to the research there should be no problem with that

Just to make sure, does the research we're doing have to be about the impact of participation in online communities? Most of my research thus far has been focused on looking into how the online communities (in my case, forums), function, rather than the personal impact of participating, however if that is what we as a whole are focusing our research on then I'm happy to hone in on that topic specifically. Msweeney00 (discuss • contribs) 18:20, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Msweeney00


 * I think it greatly depends on what section your research would fall into. For instance, my research into franchise communities doesn't so much as focus on impacts but rather the positive/negative consequences of distributing fan made content. However, if you looking at Tumblr or Twitter for example which is a lot more people focused then yeah, it makes sense that the impacts of that would be quite important. In the end, it's really your call. If it can still fit into one of the sections that has been layed out, there's no reason to not focus on how communities function rather than their impacts.Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 23:02, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey everyone, just a reminder to try to at least have some sort of content completed for the book page so we can start seeing what we have in case we have any gaps we need to fill! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 20:20, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Week Beginning 25th March
Hopefully everybody has most of if not all of their research done, we really want to make sure we're not scrambling around at the last minute. As said, adding things to the book should be top priority so that we know how much we have and how much we will need to cut out of or join up sections. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 18:25, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok I might just be being annoying but I feel like the book page would look better if we took away the title "Main Concepts" and just had "Positive Effects..." and "Negative Effects..." as main titles which would then make all of the "Communities" titles bigger and allow for even smaller titles such as the "Smart Mobs" one I put in to not be the same size as "Interest Communities" is. Just a purely aesthetic idea haha, things like that kill me. Also I was thinking that instead of a heading for introduction the introduction would just be at the top where that disclaimer is right now, cause that's how it would be on a real Wikipedia article. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 18:49, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree, I think that would look much neater, and make the page easier to navigate. If everyone else is game to alter it like that I'm in. I'll give your section a read tonight as well but I just had to tell you I think it looks really nice! I'm going to try to go through and add the citations to my section tonight and hopefully find some pictures that will look nice, maybe some logos. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 19:35, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Aw thank you, I still need to do some editing but it's pretty much almost finished. I've tried to keep it quite focused so hopefully there isn't much overlap/repetition of what anyone else is writing. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 22:39, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Also, have people seen the introduction of article 13? Although it's not a problem now, it could be in the future with regard to user-generated content? Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 15:05, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Not gonna lie, my very American self is pretty behind on the article 13 stuff, I should really look into that more. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 16:15, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Just so everyone knows, I added a little blurb as our working thesis just so we have something there while everyone is busy working on their individual sections in case we run short on time. If everyone is on board with what CnnrC said before about having the intro where our disclaimer is right now for the sake of appearance, that is where that little blurb would go. It's not much and I'm not sure what everyone will think about what I have put anyway, so feel free to edit, alter, etc however you would like, I just wanted to be safe and add that in while I was thinking about it. Just a reminder that our essay is due Friday at noon, so we need to start getting some more content on the book page! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 16:14, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

The annotated bibliography table had gone walkies again, same thing as last time, the code to end the table got deleted. Fixed it now though, just a reminder, be careful not to accidently delete the "|}" right at the end of the code whenever you're updating, it's the end table code. SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 18:03, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

I have altered the headings a bit to say "aspects" instead of "effects", which is a very minor change, but I don't think everything we're discussing will necessarily be an effect, rather we will more likely be discussing the causes and effects together, so it's a simple little thing I just thought might sound better. Obviously, as per usual, if anyone disagrees or if I'm confused or something just let me know, we can always alter it again! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 18:49, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


 * No that's fine, it actually makes more sense since we're discussing the aspects of online communities through the topics that were chosen rather than the effects these communities have. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 19:21, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

I went ahead and added the beginnings of franchise communities as well as the header for the section I'll be writing. The rest of the section will be added tomorrow - ideally with the appropriate links in place - that way things will hopefully look a little more complete and we can move onto the editing the whole thing and bringing it together.Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 20:37, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

The page looks much better now guys! CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 00:14, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Things are coming together! We should be proud of the efforts we've made so far but there is still plenty to go. Please make sure your contributions to the book are in before Friday. We really want to ensure that there is plenty of time for editing. Ideally, if possible, can everybody please begin to add their contributions to the book by the end of today (27th). If not today, tomorrow would be okay. We only have until Midday on Friday remember to have everything finished.Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 12:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah the sooner the better! As soon as we have everyone's content we need to get to editing and we'll probably have to cut a LOT of content, so we'll need some time to go over that! Once everyone has posted and we have an idea of how much we need to cut, I think we should probably start within our own sections again and see if there's anything we think can be cut without messing up the section, then look at the other sections for another perspective on what can be cut. Obviously when it comes to cutting someone else's sections or having our own sections cut we should try to be as open and objective as possible, the word count is pretty low. We'll all need to be really good at maintaining communication during these last couple of days so we're sure everyone is on board with any decisions. We can always send a message in the group chat too if people aren't seeing some posts! Just try to keep an eye out! Thanks everyone for all of the hard work! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 13:01, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I have just posted my section to the book page, let me know if i need to make any changes and I will do so. I was a little unsure how to reference the source more than once i.e I have more than one reference to a particular book. I tried to do the thing form the tips section but ended messing my section and having to go back and fix it all; so if anyone does know how to fix that, multiple references to one source code, just try it because I didn't get it. Hopefully we are all on the home stretch to getting this completed and looking acceptable on time. Doctor-Riddler (discuss • contribs) 13:05, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I just updated any references that were showing multiple times or if there were any other errors to do with that, so it's a bit tidier now I guess SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 15:24, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I did a quick check to see what our word count was sitting at and currently we're close to 3,500 words - which isn't terrible but keep that in mind for if you've still got things to add. It does mean though that a fair amount is likely to get cut - particularly in the larger sections. It was inevitable to happen since we did originally estimate that each section would have had to be around 250 words each to be close to 3000. But maybe we can play with the 10% rule that is employed in regular essays and just barely push 3,300 if we really have to. But we're so close to getting this finished - let's keep at it! Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 22:40, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

The page is looking good so far guys :) If anyone has any suggestions for my section (social mobs) free to let me know but I feel like it's finished. It's currently at 365 words and I'm not too sure what would need to be removed for the word count tbh. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 22:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Honestly your section on smart mobs should be fine to keep, it's not too long. It's sections like the beginning of personal communities and even my own fan made content and the law that will likely be chopped a bit (I know my section was close to 700 words before I published it). These are the sorts of decisions that have to be made though so that we aren't pulled up for being over the word count. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 23:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, our part about positives in personal communities is pretty massive so I imagine it'll be the first place we go for cuts. We'll know better once everyone has their own part added in though how much we need to edit SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 11:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

With some more of the sections added we're now sitting just over 4000 words - yikes - cutting down on some parts is absolutely neccesary. Anybody who hasn't added their section please try and get it in ASAP so that we have a firm idea of our word count so we can begin the editing process, we're very much running out time here. Now is the time to pull together! Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 18:39, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I've edited my section as much as I can. If anybody else wants to try and chop it down a bit more, that's fine, but I don't think much more can be cut out without it loosing the sense of what it's meant to be about. That might be a way of looking at how to cut down on your own sections. If it seems like pointless filler - get rid of it we really want to try and get as close to the 3,000 mark as possible even if sacrifices have to be made! Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 19:48, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Does anyone else have a section they could cut down a bit? I'm trying to find more to cut down in positives of personal communities, but it's getting really difficult, and we're down to around 570 words I think? But we're still at over 4000 words and we still don't have a conclusion and the introduction might need a little more elaboration too? Not sure what everyone else thinks it just looks short, but that might be fine I don't know. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 23:11, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

The only thing we need to add in is a conclusion to this and it should be just about wound up. It's been a struggle to cut down to the 3000 max, but hey, we got there through combined efforts and a lot of cutting words and sections and combining parts. It's been rough, but we all go there. Go us! Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 00:39, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Positive Effects of Participation in Online Communities

 * Franchise Communities (1. Snapshotscan) (2. MissusBrightside) (3. Ryleyfred (discuss • contribs) 18:51, 24 March 2019 (UTC))(Etsy, Redbubble, selling fan-art, relationship between producer and consumer Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 17:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC))
 * Interest Communities (1. Kerencolling) (2. Jessiehosk27) (fandoms and topic specific content, Reddit, interests not personal details Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 17:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC)) (3. Msweeney00) (forum based communities) Msweeney00 (discuss • contribs) 18:18, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Msweeney00
 * Personal Communities (1. OutOfBoundsHeather) (2. SoylentGraeme) (personal details like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 17:56, 14 March 2019 (UTC))

Negative Effects of Participation in Online Communities

 * Franchise Communities (1. Snapshotscan) (2. MissusBrightside)
 * Interest Communities (1. Dr-Riddler) (2. CnnrC)
 * Personal Communities (1. Mmm00044) (2. Chiarabpapo)

Franchise Communities
I have created these 3 sections in order for people to start working on their pieces collectively. Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Here you and your small team can start to build and work on your section of the Franchise Communities together. You can start to formulate your arguments away from the other sections for it to remain clear what you are working on at all times. Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 16:06, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I think it might just be me on this section, nobody has said anything else about writing for it. Which is fair enough, it takes up a rather small minority in quite an extensive topic - personal and interest communities are, after all, broader in the way they can be approached and what can be covered. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 17:35, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * If you end up needing any help with this section let me know, I can always do some looking into some other producer/consumer relationships outside of fanart, or if someone who hasn't chosen a topic yet wants to do that of course would also work. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 18:59, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll jump on board with ya here. I think we could definitely touch on some big picture impacts of communities like these. We'll keep in touch. MissusBrightside (discuss • contribs) 20:07, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

I went ahead an added some headers for the positive/negative aspects to be filled in as and when they are needed to be. Just so it would be easier to break everything up. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 19:39, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

I added the basis of what I think should be included in the final book, right now it's just a rough take on it so if anybody has any thoughts on what I added or any suggestions for changes or other content that could be included that would be pretty helpful Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 12:39, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Do you maybe want to take one section each perhaps, that way there is less likely to be overlap in our research rather than if we were to just do research for both sections. I'm happy to do the negative effects since that is what I was originally going to be researching. I don't mind doing it the other way around if you want though. Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 11:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That works for me, I'll take the positive effects. Guess I didn't read the table right the first time around, but I'm on it now. Thank ya! MissusBrightside (discuss • contribs) 15:11, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Positives of Franchise Communities
The most basic idea of franchising communities in a positive light is the giving back to the community. People are willing to create fan art, mod games, write fan fiction etc either for very little money, through websites such as RedBubble or Etsy, or completely for free through the means of posting online on the likes of Tumblr, Twitter, AO3 etc. The act of giving back for free has led to a lot of fan contributions being called a 'gift economy' rather than an economic economy due to the lack of monetary gain involved.

This will make up the basis of what I'll be adding to the book, mostly focusing on the willingness of creators to do things for free purely for the enjoyment of others in the community and the effects this has on the owners of the original content and how that is or is not affected by the legal issues of fan created content. I hope to look into the terms of service set out by three main hosters of franchised fan content - Etsy, Redbubble and AO3 This also plays a huge role in unifying the members of a community in a real network-- something that would be really difficult to accomplish from the original works alone. The book/movie/whatever may create the fandom, but it's these communities that bring it together.

Negatives of Franchise Communities
On the negative side of things, there are the legal issues - particularly regarding the selling of licenced material. This is where an obvious division between fan creators becomes. Fan artists and game modders have found a way to monetise their contributions to the community through platforms such as Steam for modders or, for artists, participating in artist alleys or selling online. Fan writers and fan video creators have yet to really be able to monetise their efforts as much others in the creator communities.

The negative side of things for franchising communities unfortunately outweighs the positive things so it's likely that these two sections may become a little unbalanced due to that. However, I will try to focus mostly on the same sort of things - that being how fan creators are negatively impacted by the original content owners and the relations those monetised works have to the law and whether there is protection for them. Again I'll be looking at Etsy, Redbubble and AO3. Especially on RedBubble and AO3 as they have pretty strong rules regarding monetisation and copyrighted content.

These are hugely important points. I think you're right to be wary of an unbalanced argument between positives and negatives on this issue, but come on. Let's crush em. We ought to also discuss the long term effects of really investing time into communities of this nature, and how they're impacted by things like bankruptcy in the company or drastic changes in profits and ownership. It's a bit of a risk, really.


 * I agree that looking into the long term effects of investing time and often money into fan communities is worth it, this could possibly be connected to the doujinshi circles in Japan and how these artists can continue to make money and sometimes even a living, off of writing fan comics of licensed material. Changes in ownership might be worth looking into because of how the licencing owners of franchises can have a huge impact on whether or not fan created content can even be created in the first place (for instance Disney, notorious for disallowing the selling and distribution of fan art). Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 21:03, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Interest Communities
I have created these 3 sections in order for people to start working on their pieces collectively. Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * As explained before, this is where we can start to work on our piece as a whole and talk amongst ourselves about what we are going to include within our essay. Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 16:08, 21 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Great, thank you! Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 13:56, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

I read an article about a survey that was done on seniors in online communities, it was all based on people who use forums/message boards. It doesn't fit into my own area of research but there might be something useful in it for you guys. It's the Nimrod, G. reading and it's the third one down in the big annotated bibliography table, if any of you are interested SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 20:03, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

That sounds like it could fit into my topic of research, so I'll definitely look into it, thank you for posting! Msweeney00 (discuss • contribs) 18:16, 22 March 2019 (UTC)Msweeney00

As I have an presentation due for tomorrow, Wednesday the 27th of March, I shall start working on my piece after that deadline: which will be 10am. I'll start to add my draft for my Tumblr Communities and then we can start to piece together our essay drafts to make one or two paragraphs on our subject combined?Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 13:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Sounds good Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 19:19, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Tumblr Communities Draft
I've just made this little section just so I can keep my work clear from the rest of what everyone else is writing, feel free to move it around whilst you guys are editing, but please tell me so I can find it again! Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 13:48, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

--

One of the main sites which bring communities together is Tumblr. Tumblr is a microblogging platform which has been ‘reported to be the most popular social site among [the] young generation, as half of Tumblr’s visitors are under 25 years old.’ For many individuals, Tumblr has become a safe space to come together as a community and share thoughts and interests on different areas. Social media networks, like Tumblr, allow for the interaction of individuals from across the globe based on mutual social connections or shared interests.

Megan DeSouza, a graduate from the University of Rhode Island, explained in an article she wrote about the affects on individuals within a community on Tumblr, that ‘Entire online "communities" of like-minded individuals, therefore, can be brought together without ever knowing each other's real-world identities, simply through interaction on such networks’. DeSouza used the popular hit BBC Mystery Drama ‘Sherlock’ as an inspiration for her looking into Tumblr to see how the fans interacted and how the fandom community came together when there were long periods of time between each new season of Sherlock, and how the fans would occupy their time during these hiatuses. She found that a lot of the communities came together to speculate what was going to happen within the next coming episodes as well as seasons overall, as well as this, she found that people were sharing their favourite photos and ‘gifs’ of the show.

Tumblr has become a site in which individuals are brought together through their interests and therefore become a part of the fandom culture and discuss their thoughts to a larger audience of people who have the same common interests. People become part of community where anonymity is the forefront of the site, this allows for people to feel more included within their communities. Meaning, Tumblr is a place where communities build on a basis of aesthetics and interests, rather than who you are as a person. This allows for people to feel a part of a community when they might not have one in real life.

Smart Mobs Draft
Note: These are just rough ideas that need to be re-organised and sourced etc before I would be finished with them. CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 23:24, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Note 2: Cleared up the references. Can anyone confirm they're formatted correctly? CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 18:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

--

Smart Mobs is a term used to describe a group of people who use digital technology and media to co-operate and communicate. The concept was defined by Howard Rheingold. The internet allows people to produce and share content in ways never seen before, turning consumers into producers. A smart mob on its own is neither a good thing or a bad thing, the intent of the group is what matters. A smart mob can be seen as the embodiment of collective intelligence and once communicating they can gather physically or online.

An example of smart mobs using digital technology to then connect in the real world would be planning protests or riots via texting and then meeting up to actually take part (example: 2005 French riots)

Online, smart mobs often gather on social media where it can be easy for groups of like-minded people to attack and berate someone else on the platform for something they have said or done. The most common place for this type of social mob mentality is twitter where it is easy to people to hide their true identity to take part in the harassment of someone. A new term gaining popularity in social media is cancel culture where a mob declares someone to be "cancelled" due to something they have done that has been seen as problematic or unacceptable. Criticisms of this cancel culture often discuss how people are usually being vilified for things they have done in the past (Example: Kevin Hart's 2011 homophobic tweets being brought up in 2019 ). Often these mobs refuse to accept that people's opinions can change over time, as well as what is culturally acceptable changing too. The concept of "social justice" and "social justice warriors" online did not exist in the mainstream before around 2013 with edgy humour being normal. Those in the mob act morally superior and hold people to unobtainable standards by digging into people's past when they likely have said similar things themselves.

Twitter Revised Draft
Twitter has enabled fans to create groups which over time become a close knit group of people, creating a community. These groups range from supporting music artists to films or TV series. Since it was introduced in 2006 Twitter has established its reputation as the main platform for communication between celebrities and their audiences [13].

The One Direction fandom in particular proved to be dominant across the platform, with just over 30 million followers. In 2015, fans dominated the trending feature on the website, as they paid tribute to the band's five-year anniversary and successfully created trends dedicated to each of the members over a week long period [14]. This period of time demonstrates the potential power of a fandom formed over the website, with the community highly influential.

However, these fandoms often do not interact well with others on the platform, such as between the One Direction and Justin Bieber fandoms. This is accentuated over awards season, where voting takes place on the website for various shows. In 2016, tensions were heightened between the two, when Bieber's fandom beat One Direction's to the award of Best Fandom in the iHeartRadio Awards.

Despite the negatives that can arise from fandom culture, the website is a place that allows different groups of people to bond over their common interest. Creating a feeling of community, the fandom can often become a close-knit group of people who feel closer to their favourite celebrity and can discuss with like-minded people their opinions and views.

Personal Communities
I have created these 3 sections in order for people to start working on their pieces collectively. Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 16:02, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Here you can start to work on your piece as a group, separate to everyone else's work. Just to make things clearer for yourselves and for the page to look organised. Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 16:11, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Amazing, thank you so much! OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 18:57, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Positives
I've added a small section to the actual book page, basically just so I can start working through some content without getting stuck in a word document and forgetting about the wiki page. Obviously feel free to look through anything I post and tell me what you think, I just wanted to make sure you knew it wasn't necessarily what I intend to be my final piece. I know we aren't supposed to sign any of our work on the book page, but for the sake of our sanity while we're still compiling things, I've put 2 separate sections for us to work in so we can both be adding without worrying about mixing content yet. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 19:21, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey, I saw what you added to the book page and it seemed a little bit like an overview of personal communities as a whole before we go into the specifics of it, talking through the positives and citing sources for it, so I took it and edited and added to it a little, just for use as the introductory paragraph before we get to our own specific sections. I put it in "section 2" for now and left what you wrote in "section 1" so you can have a look and let me know what you think about what to use there SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 19:52, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, I found some articles that are about benefits of medical professionals using Facebook to contact/interact with patients, and also stuff about benefits of Facebook in a professional setting. I don't know how well that fits into an "online community", but I guess your doctor is still part of the community, and they're using the online community of Facebook to interact, so do you think it's worth looking through those more thoroughly at all? SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 20:00, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome, I'll give your introduction a look in just a bit, I think I started to read an article about the same thing, I think it could definitely be used in some way. It may not be a main focus, but it's definitely worth mentioning, we can decide how much to focus on it later. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 21:06, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok, gave your edit a read, I think it's great! The only thing is for the examples you gave about developing communities by following certain people on twitter, I think the team one works great, but maybe we should change the one about sharing hobbies to celebrities or something? Just because I want to make sure we maintain our focus on personal profiles without bleeding over into interest communities. What do you think? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 13:34, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah I wasn't sure about it myself really, the platform Facebook is more personal but you can use it to find specific interest based communities too. Might be worthwhile just getting rid of that bit altogether? SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 20:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * For right now I would say it's fine, (would you mind if I change it to celebrities for now though?) just because it's a small section we can easily remove later if we think it's best, but as we don't have a ton right now we might as well see if we end up discussing that aspect deeper? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 23:26, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah sure go ahead, since we can look at previous edits anyway if you fancy changing something you should just go ahead and do it, we can see what is best when we're finalising everything SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 12:01, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

It's really unpolished right now, but I've added a bit more to our section of the book page, so let me know what you think when you have a chance. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 20:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, just for the sake of awareness, what is in our section of the book right now is like 720 words I think? So once all five other sections and the intro are done, we'll probably have to cut some things out, especially if there is anything else we feel like we need to add, but I know we all want to get good marks for contributing so don't worry about going over right now if there is anything you want added. I still need to go through and do citations and all that too. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 15:38, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It seems fine to me at the moment, I think I'll have a look at maybe adding a bit of polish if I can and tying it into social capital with reference to the reading we both did, and then I was looking to write a paragraph or so about the benefits for health professionals etc that have been mentioned in a couple of studies SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 17:09, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, after I've added all my stuff to it it's gotten huge, there'll be some major pruning required I think but it's nice to see the page filling up I suppose. I think once other sections are more filled out it'll be easier to see what is best to cut (I hope...) SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 18:11, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome, I'll give it a look! Yeah I was hoping to be able to include the social capital reading, I think that's really interesting. I anticipated having too much text to start with, so yeah hopefully it won't be too bad to cut down once we find a clear path with everyone's work. It probably won't be easy, because obviously if we wrote it we wanted it in, but I think we'll be able to find patterns between each groups' work to form a clean, coherent piece. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 18:34, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think your additions are really good, and I think we might be able to edit a bit of the more specific content out of the first section and let it stay as it is in that section-like the bits about students leaving home and maintaining relationships online, maybe we can be more general in the first paragraph since it's more important to describe it with the social capital section? I'll give that a shot now, and just let me know if you think it still works. That alone won't cut down the word count too much, but it is a little edit we can do now. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 18:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah there was probably some repetition there so it was a good place to start the pruning. I'm not sure what else we'll have to trim down but I guess we'll know better once the other sections are filled out how much we might have to cut! SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 00:09, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

So in regards to cutting down our section, what would you think about getting rid of the entire last little paragraph? As much as I do think an important positive aspect of online communities is being able to enjoy it, it's definitely the least objective part, it's not like there's any real studies on it that would make it worth citing much of anything anyway. That would cut off 153 words, but I was really off on our word count, our section right now is like 900 some words so with that cut out we'd be at around 774 (I'm not sure if captions and all that count towards it at all). We could also probably remove the section that talks about maintaining relationships all together in the first paragraph since it has its own section later on. As we discussed before too we can probably cut out the first line of the first paragraph since it does touch on interest communities a bit and we are in dire need of cutting down our section. We can also probably get rid of the line about student life being stressful since it's not necessarily relevant to the section. There's also a citation in the text that we can delete since it'll be in the superscript anyway. I think we can probably combine some sentences about keeping up with family and friends' lives and the one about stories and such, I'm just trying to polish the wording to make sure it still flows nicely. With all of these changes I think I have gotten it down to around 600 words, so we'd just need to cut a little more. Does all that sound okay to you? If it would make it easier to compare I can post the edited version underneath of our current one just so it's easier to see? OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 21:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That all sounds okay to me, we can have a look after those changes and see what else we might need to carve out, we did end up with a fair bit... SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 22:43, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I've edited the book page, I've got a copied version of the original version though so it can be easily added back in. So give it a look when you can, and let me know if any of it seems too choppy or incomplete now. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 22:53, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * That puts us at 572 by the way, which isn't too much over what it should be I think. OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 22:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's not much over. There's not really any little changes left we could do I think, if it comes to it that we have to be ruthless and cut more though if we got rid of the second paragraph we would get to 476 and it would still read pretty well. I'd rather not have to do that obviously, just maybe something to consider if we're pushed to take any more out SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 23:32, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Negatives
I am currently researching and finalising my resources but I will be focusing on group mentality on social media and the 'cancelled culture' online. Might change this once I am done with my research but that is roughly the area that I would like to write about. Chiarabpapo (discuss • contribs) 12:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography
Note on Citations: Greg recommends we use APA in-text citation in addition to the Wiki Referencing method Mmm00044 (discuss •contribs) 12:04, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Went to the library yesterday and got a book called 'Online Communities' by Jenny Preece. I will have a look during the weekend and update the page with what I find that could be interesting for the project. I also think books the deal with sociology could be good for the topic. Chiarabpapo (discuss • contribs) 12:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

I went through the resource list of the module and thought I would write down the ones that can be useful for our essay. Chiarabpapo (discuss • contribs) 12:22, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

The links weren't working so I removed them, we'll just have to go through Canvas to get access. Chiarabpapo (discuss • contribs) 12:47, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ‘What Are Social Media?' (pp. 1-23)
 * ‘Media, Technology and Society’ (pp. 1-16)
 * 'Interactive TV in the age of social participation’ (pp. 112-129)
 * ‘Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution’ (pp. 29-62)
 * ‘A Networked Self and Platforms, Stories, Connections’ (pp. 144-159)
 * ‘Our Networked Selves: Personal Connection and Relational Maintenance in Social Media Use’ (pp. 353-371)

I found this study on the Alt-Right community on Youtube. The article looks okay but I don't know if it's peer reviewed. If it isn't peer reviewed do you think we can still reference the argument it poses? If anyone has any thoughts on this let me know :) https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/DS_Alternative_Influence.pdf Mmm00044 (discuss • contribs) 21:53, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


 * I think we can use stuff that is not peer reviewed but we have to be careful when doing so and not overuse it. I would suggest doing a quick google search of the author's name on both Google and Google scholar; as most academics have google scholar pages listing their published works.Doctor-Riddler (discuss • contribs) 19:03, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I found a piece today that I thought could be helpful to those doing fandoms, especially communities on Tumblr. i'm not 100% sure of its origins but I did find it in the University Library Catalogue so I'm hoping that it is usable. Social Media Fandom Doctor-Riddler (discuss • contribs) 19:12, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I am doing the same

https://www.academia.edu/491940/The_Dynamics_of_Fandom_Exploring_Fan_Communities_in_Online_Spaces

https://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9dAJBAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA85&dq=online+communities+in+sports+teams&ots=22-W5y1_lI&sig=pTVJ_HXxo-UVcIcePm_zmjAwTcA#v=onepage&q=online%20communities%20in%20sports%20teams&f=false Ryleyfred (discuss • contribs) 23:55, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Contributors
Hi guys, can everyone sign their names under their groups so we can easily find eachother? Cheers :) Mmm00044 (discuss • contribs) 12:22, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

The Fantastic Four

 * 1) Mmm00044 (discuss • contribs) 12:19, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) Doctor-Riddler (discuss • contribs) 12:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 12:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 4) Chiarabpapo (discuss • contribs) 12:45, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Out of Bounds

 * 1) OutOfBoundsHeather (discuss • contribs) 13:24, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) CnnrC (discuss • contribs) 13:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) MissusBrightside (discuss • contribs) 13:07, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 4) Snapshotscan (discuss • contribs) 13:32, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Colling's Community

 * 1) Kerencolling (discuss • contribs) 15:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 2) Msweeney00 (discuss • contribs) 15:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 3) SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 15:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 4) Ryleyfred (discuss • contribs) 15:49, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Tips & Tricks
Don't forget to save your text on word or copy them to the clipboard in case it gets lost Mmm00044 (discuss • contribs) 13:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

if anyone is stuck on editing there is a cheatsheet that can give you an idea of the diffrent editing commands and how to add other extra bits. Let me know if the link doesn't work Doctor-Riddler (discuss • contribs) 18:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

i have another trick i found particularly helpful. If you press ctrl+F you search the page for the date and all the posts from that day will be highlighted. Just in case you don't notice something at first glance Doctor-Riddler (discuss • contribs) 16:18, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I usually find myself clicking "View history" at the top of the page to see how many contributions or updates there have been since I was last on as well, it's next to the star you would click to add a page to your Watchlist SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 17:18, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Greg showed us another group's page in the seminar which was organised quite nicely, it might be helpful to keep checking up on other group's essay/discussion pages for ideas when it comes to formatting etc. Msweeney00 (discuss • contribs) 15:53, 12 March 2019 (UTC)Msweeney00

Does anyone know how to cite articles etc on here? I've been trying to work it out but I'm struggling. Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 20:58, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * When you go into edit mode there is actually a drop down menu in the form of the help button. I just found this out but by clicking it; it opens a menu with all of the editing codes and things. It is also organised by the category, like formatting, referencing, links, etc. Hope that helps somewhat. Doctor-Riddler (discuss • contribs) 21:49, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * okay, I'll try that. Thank you! Jessiehosk27 (discuss • contribs) 22:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

If anyone wants to reference the same article or source more than once without it showing up multiple times on the bibliography there's instructions on how to do it here. It should be quite simple but if you need help give me a shout! SoylentGraeme (discuss • contribs) 00:06, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: COLLABORATIVE ESSAY
General Feedback: Essays of this standard attain the following grade descriptor for the collaborative essay. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular and individual response to the brief, this will give you a more clear idea of how the grade you have been given relates to the standards and quality expected of work at this level:
 * Good. Among other things, work of this standard will make a clear point in a clear way. It will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. It will make effective use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons). It may also demonstrate a broader understanding of the module's themes and concerns, and is likely to show evidence of reading and thinking about the subject material. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.

Specific Feedback:
 * You have submitted a fairly solid response to the brief. Here you outline a number of arguments that specifically address the theme of ˈˈOnline Communitiesˈˈ, and your discussion of the research evidences a fairly good working knowledge of a range of scholarship on your chosen topic. The examples around fan fiction and aspects of copyright (and alternative models of licencing) are really interesting, well-researched and informative. That you have chosen to discuss your theme in this way, opening the argument on aspects of people-centred activities is particularly well thought out. This is because, of course although not all online communities are made up of fans and their production practices, there are aspects of these specific issues that hold the key to understanding early drivers of Web activity and popularity, that from our perspective today are increasingly difficult to visualise.
 * The essay is generally written in an authoritative, yet casual style which suits this kind of publication. Your argument is structured fairly logically, is (fairly) critically engaged, and you have demonstrated awareness of at least the contradictions inherent in the theme itself. I would have liked a little more on alternative licencing and copyright models (open licencing and CC, for example, are fairly common), as well as some of the scholarship that engages these issues, as well as perhaps more direct use of the scholarship on aspects of fandom and fan cultures, from media and cultural studies perspectives. But overall this works well as it is. This is really solid work.

N.B.: Feedback for your discussion, and individual contribs elements for the assessment will be given on your individual User Discussion Pages. Grades for all work will communicated confidentially via Canvas.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 14:57, 1 May 2019 (UTC)