User talk:ArianneStirling

Hi, I'm Arianne Stirling! This is my discussion page for my educational class project! I am interested in exploring wikibooks. ArianneStirling (discuss • contribs) 18:05, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1: What makes a good wiki?
In this post I will talk about online collaboration in a general sense and discuss the clear differences between social media I would use on a daily basis and wiki engagement. I use various social media platforms on a daily basis such as Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat. In terms of collecting interaction between different users I think Facebook is best for this. We can gather quite a lot of information from this platform through the use of so many different pages on Facebook as well as through our ‘friends’ pages for example News pages sharing daily news from around the world with Facebook users and our ‘friends’ being able to ‘share’ pages, videos, status’s etc. which will appear on my newsfeed. We also associate Facebook with the notion of ‘instant response’. We use it to message people expecting a quick response as we know they will receive the message straight away. This feature can be extremely helpful when it comes to aiding workflow and sharing ideas, for example for us students; We can create a group message where everyone can share their ideas with each other which is great for group projects etc.

Instagram and Snapchat can be seen in a similar light. I use Instagram simply to just look at pictures or videos people have uploaded, it is possible to comment and like them but that’s it. Snapchat is a lot like Instagram in a way where you can only upload pictures or videos although the difference is they only last 10 seconds. It is possible to message people and also on the ‘stories’ section, we have the choice to view ‘featured’ pages from for example from ‘The Sun’ or ‘Buzzfeed’ to ‘Skynews’. Therefore does have an element of interest in the world but a lot of the time users just use this platform as a way of passing time or seeing what their friends get up to, therefore cannot be used as a mode of workflow.

We also need to think about the fact it is so easy to set up these social media platforms, it is quick and simple and before we know it we have an account which is also simple and straightforward to use! Whereas with Wikipedia, even although it is quick and simple to set up an account, when it comes to functioning the page that’s where it gets complicated. As I have already mentioned in my first post, I have just set up my wiki account for a class project therefore we have no choice but to use it. The platform is hard to navigate and you need patience to learn how to use it, for example, If my module tutor didn’t spend the time to explain to me how to navigate the page and I was left to figure it out myself by my own choice, I wouldn’t have bothered. Although it is a much more professional platform than the previous social media platforms I have talked about. It allows for professional opinions and is used in a mature way. We also need to mention the fact Wikipedia can be edited, changed and updated on a daily basis whereas Facebook, Snapchat and Instagram can be looked at in a different light. Although it is possible to edit posts, these social media platforms are criticised much more closer than the likes of Wikipedia, for example, people can screenshot things which can be kept forever such as when celebrities post something embarrassing or spelt incorrect etc. they could delete it 20 minutes later but someone out there will have screenshot it and therefore is out in the world forever which shows the immature element that comes with these social media platforms.

In terms of blogs, they can be seen as between platforms such as social media and Wikipedia. Of course anyone can post what they want but the posts are usefully focused on a certain topic area. For example, I have only used a Tumblr blog once, which was at college for a class project where I had to analyse different documentaries therefore this page was extremely useful for the exercise as it was a free space for our own thoughts, ideas and workflow where nobody else could comment or interfere.

One of the clear differences between social media such as Facebook, twitter, Instagram or snapchat and a Wikipedia is the content which is posted. Social media platforms such as Facebook is not always useful as there is a lot of irrelevant information/posts which can be a distraction. Anyone can post, comment or share whatever they like in whatever manner they like which is not one bit professional. Whereas Wikipedia is clearly a professional page which is well maintained by users simply sharing knowledge.

ArianneStirling (discuss • contribs) 11:41, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wiki Exercise #1


Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to Understanding and Engagement elements, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall.


 * Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory entries may try to relate an idea from the module to an original example, but might not be very convincing. They may waste space on synopsis or description, rather than making a point. They may have spelling or grammatical errors and typos. They might not demonstrate more than a single quick pass at the assignment, informed only by lecture and/or cursory reading. They may suggest reading but not thinking (or indeed the reverse). The wiki markup formatting will need some work.


 * This post is at the upper end of this grade band, so a little improvement will go a long way to attaining a higher mark. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to look at the Grade Descriptors and (especially for this, perhaps, the Understanding) criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Less instrumentally, and more in relation to this particular post, you would have gained much higher marks (in an assessed scenario) if you had a) used the markup a little more effectively to break up the text-heaviness a bit and b) if you had fulfilled the brief and responded to two posts as required (only found a single response on here!).


 * Remember that the comments are "worth" as much as posts themselves. The reason for this is not only to help encourage discussion (a key element of wiki collaboration!) but also to get you to reflect upon your own work. This can all, of course be used to fuel ideas that might form part of your project work. Also, making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would go a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, as you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this will make a considerable difference.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 18:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

ArianneStirling (discuss • contribs) 18:10, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Class Comments:
comment #1
 * Hi Arianne, I have a similar experience to you with social media and I also feel the same way about Wikipedia - I think it would have been difficult for me to navigate without someone explaining it to me first. I think it's because it's not set up in the same way as social media accounts. On social media accounts you can usually apply the same rules to understand it - they all have home pages with News Feed-like systems along with personal pages etc. whereas the template for Wikipedia is very different with the Talk pages and everything.

I also like how you describe blogs as 'in between' social media and Wikipedia, I was trying to write about blogs on my own post but found it quite difficult to define, I think you've summed it up well. I'd like to add my experience of Tumblr as I have used that site for some years now. I think it has become increasingly more social over the years with more users wanting to communicate more effectively with others. This has meant the site has changed with the addition of a private 'chat' feature. This may mean that although blogs are usually more independent, they can become more collaborative with increased ease of communication which, like on Facebook, is instant as you get a notification. But still, many Tumblr users prefer to use the site as you described the way you liked to use it, so it's a more flexible platform I think, hence why I feel 'in between' is very fitting. Katienotcatriona (discuss • contribs) 16:26, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

comment #2
 * Hi, Arianne, Tony here! You make a lot of great points. I, too, was very anxious about using Wikipedia. It’s definitely an adjustment. I like how you contrasted this with how quick and simple it is to create an account on other social media websites. It’s true that we really don’t stop and consider just how accessible these platforms are. We have grown so accustomed to the quick and easy that it’s really quite daunting when we are faced with an interface that is much more complex. It really invites a question about our attention span in relation to social media. Wikipedia is a space online that we may very well grow to enjoy but we wouldn’t have bothered otherwise simply because it requires a little more thought and input.

I agree with your point about the response to people making silly mistakes on social media. These moments are immortalised by the use of screenshots and others don’t consider how this could have a detrimental effect on the person’s mental health. Online culture, especially on platforms like Twitter and Facebook, can be quite cruel and too often users forget that those who are ridiculed are real people. It really highlights the shift in morality that occurs when people go online.

I really enjoyed reading your post!Tonyvall (discuss • contribs) 23:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: Visibility and Data Trails
I undoubtedly have an online presence on multiple social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat although when it comes to visibility and data trails, I would like to think my profiles are as private as they possible can be as I have all the settings in place to make my information, posts, pictures etc. private.

Using Facebook as an example, it has privacy settings which does give us a certain sense of control based around our profile. Although there is still the sense of someone out there in the world having our information/details and we have no idea who they are and what they could do with it, I understand the owners of sites also have rules but it’s the sense of not knowing that could make us feel uneasy.

Continuing with Facebook as an example, talking from my own experience, and hearing from various other people’s experience; every now and again I receive a random friend request for example from someone half way across the world who I have no idea even existed with no mutual friends etc. and I wonder “How on earth did this person even find my profile?” As I have said my Facebook profile is on private in every way possible therefore how has this person found access to my profile where they can view my profile picture, name and where I live etc. This brings me to the main argument of “How visible am I online?”.

Online visibility isn’t completely in my control. Out of curiosity and through the use of demonstrating my point, I google searched my name. To be honest I was pleasantly surprised as only the following came up: Therefore, considering how accessible our information and profiles can be, I was glad someone couldn’t just access whatever they wanted.
 * a ‘just giving’ page I created to raise money for cancer toward a run I will be doing. (which can be seen as a good thing)
 * an old twitter page I used when I was younger although as I had it set to private, nothing is accessible.
 * a link to my Instagram page although this is also private therefore once clicking into it someone would have to request to follow me which would be my decision.
 * my Facebook profile (under the same privacy circumstances as my Instagram)
 * and only 2 pictures on google images; one from the twitter profile made years ago and one from my Gmail account.

Following up on this point, the reason for being surprised is because when I was younger (possibly 13/14) I remember searching my name and so many things coming up, I felt so uneasy at the fact anyone could google my name and find every social media site with all of my information as well as pictures and friends’ posts about me etc. which lead me to changing all of my privacy settings as well as deleting some of my social media profiles which I no longer used.

Following this, I think it is quite clear that we never truly know who has access to our data and what they may do with it. Another area to possible think about is ‘hackers’? Lets face it, a few privacy settings on Facebook wont stop someone getting access to our profile if they have the correct knowledge and tools. I’m talking from experience as my Facebook profile has been hacked before. Therefore this notion of online surveillance is still very much important, even in todays culture for the use of entertainment. A good example of this is the film Unfriended as it is based around social media, online activity and how quickly our information or a post can be seen/shared and the effects it can have on people. Even although this is a fictional film with the use of the horror genre, the message behind this film can be related to in our society.

In relation to linking the theme of ‘visibility’ into my wiki book project, I would say I feel a lot safer and even though anyone can view my posts, they still don’t know who I am or where I come from etc. They’re simply reading my opinions and thoughts which I have been responsible for posting.

In conclusion, I feel that it’s nearly impossible to remain fully invisible online, as profiles pictures etc. are always accessible, but I think my profiles are as private as they possible can be. The multiple options and settings in place on social media sites make it possible for me and give me the choice of making my profile private.

ArianneStirling (discuss • contribs) 22:34, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Class Comments:
comment #1
 * I definitely agree with your point saying that the security settings on Facebook could give us a false sense of security over our information and identity. However, we all know that there are some people who have complete access to these pieces of information. I was wondering would knowing that someone could use your personal information ever stop from joining a social network site? I have found myself several times wanting to delete certain personal information from Facebook but then thinking it is pointless as they probably have access to it anyway.

Also, another example of TV show talking about those online identity issues at length is the show Mr Robot. In this show, the protagonist can hack anyone's account and finds every piece of information on them. It shows that we are now visible on every site that we are on even if it's not social media.

I do find myself very visible on this wiki book website even if it's for a university project. While other people might not know who I am, a majority of the people who read what I write are people I know as I have a username they can find on a sheet which in my opinion defeats the whole anonymity of grading at a university.

Clarabiswiki (discuss • contribs) 16:41, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Clarabiswiki (discuss • contribs) 16:42, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Reply to Clara's comment:
 * Responding to your question ‘’’ ‘would knowing someone could use your personal information stop me from joining a social network site?’ ‘’’ I think it would depend on which information it was. Say for example if they were to use my email address to give to other companies to send me whats known as ‘junk mail’ then it wouldn’t bother me too much if I really wanted to join the site. Although I would be quite sneaky around this area as for all of my social networking sites I use my old email address so that my main email address is only used for important more trusted sites. But to finish answering your question, If I wasn’t bothered about joining the social network site then I wouldn’t give my information, like wise if they wanted more important information than my email address, I wouldn’t go through with it. What about yourself?

I found your comment on the fact people can find our username and find our work defeating the whole anonymity of grading at university interesting as I never thought of it that way before. Thanks for your comment! ArianneStirling (discuss • contribs) 19:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

comment #2
 * I think the concept of hacking is so terrifying in the social media sense because we spend so much time forging our online identities to portray a certain image. Depending on the platform we have known friends and followers who perceive us in a certain way. We may be witty on Twitter or social on Facebook, but it is something, often an aspect of ourselves, that we really enforce in order to alter how we come across. Once another person has access to that then they can alter anything they wish, contact close friends or relatives, and simply "become us". It always appears as a joke when a person leaves an account logged on at a friend's house and said friend makes a post on the active account to call them out for it, but the moment we realize we left such a personal account open to others, there's a moment of panic. We may trust people with our lives, but rarely will we give them access to our accounts, our laptop, or our phone. Hacking is just an extension of the panic as we realize we have no control over our perceived self. It's interesting considering how willingly we give away personal information when ordering things online or agreeing to meet up with people to sell items. We freely give our address and credit card information just trusting that the source is credible, but when it comes to social media we are protective because it has to do with how we are seen. It's more to do with the ego than anything else. Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 18:29, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

comment #3 GailZWiki (discuss • contribs) 21:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi Arianne, you brought up online surveillance which I think is an interesting topic because it can be both positive and negative. On the one hand, it is used to protect and monitor sites and prevent illegal activity, but it can also be taken advantage of which leads to people’s privacy being compromised. It seems that to enjoy the benefits of the internet, we do have to take some risks – as you said, we don’t really know who is viewing our information and what they could be using it for.

It is certainly still sensible to maintain privacy setting as much as possible on personal accounts, as it seems you have done. Your comment about what you write on Wikibooks as being your responsibility opens up a bigger statement about our online privacy in general. Although sometimes hacking will occur, and there is not much we can do about that, what we put online is our choice and responsibility, and everyone needs to be aware that their online information is visible and could be vulnerable. GailZWiki (discuss • contribs) 21:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

comment #4
 * Hey I agree with your point about sites having security settings and how it creates a sense of control over our own privacy, however sometimes I feel it's just that - a sense. In my opinion sites like Facebook have these settings to make you feel like you can be completely in control of what people have access to but I don't believe we actually are. I also think we sometimes forget that our friends/family post things about us too (photos, status updates, places we've been together) and we have zero control over how they have their privacy set. This means that people they're friends with can find out information about us that we otherwise wouldn't be comfortable with them knowing. In regards to what you said about receiving random friend requests from people who are entirely disconnected from us (I've had a fair few myself and find it totally bizarre how they found me in the first place too), it's become apparent that they can also send you messages - these appear in a filtered section of your main inbox - so even though you can decline their request they can still contact you. Personally, I don't post an incredible amount on social media sites, but do you find on the sites you use the most you're ever cautious/hesitant of what you post or do you feel secure enough within your online visibility? I understand that there is information which we want to share for certain people to see but in doing that we're also sharing that information with people whom we don't know particularly well. Hayleygil (discuss • contribs) 21:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Information Overload
There is definitely an overload of information online, which can be a great way of describing internet in our society today. Due to the over load of information online it is very possible to become distracted one way or another. In my opinion being easily distracted can be a choice, although there are 3 ways to look at this:
 * 1) if I am in a situation where I can’t be interrupted or distracted then I will just ignore my phone or even put it on silent therefore I won’t even know when I have a notification. An example being when I’m in seminars I use the ‘do not disturb’ feature on my iPhone because it won’t distract me from taking notes and if someone was to phone me etc. my phone won’t make noise in class.
 * 2) If we are in a situation such as just sitting at home bored and looking for something to do then opening a site such as, surely the whole point is to be distracted? For example when I’m on YouTube I would go onto the Ellen Show or the Late Late Show and watch interviews etc. Then I would click on whichever ‘suggested’ videos I liked the look of at the side- therefore being distracted?
 * 3) It can be easy to get distracted, an example being advertisements online. whether I am doing research for an essay or just surfing the web an advertisement such as clothing appears which automatically I become interested in and click on it, unless I am in a position where I’m not interested or not in the right situation. But yes I feel it can be easy to get distracted if we let ourselves.

Continuing from my example of researching for an essay, we are encouraged to access online academic materials, which really does open your eyes to the amount of academic material available never mind the normal, everyday, social information uploaded to the internet on a daily basis. We also have compulsory readings to complete for our seminars every week which is also accessible online; again, encouraging us to read through different information provided online.



The question of ‘Why have you come to deal with it in this way?’, is interesting because I have never thought of it in this way before. It just comes as second nature to me, I’m just used to being online and either acknowledging or ignoring the features which come along with it. Perhaps when I think of it this way, a quote from Sherry Turkle stating “those little devices in our pockets are so psychologically powerful, that they don’t only change what we do – they change who we are” helps me understand her point. So if we actually consider ‘why we deal with it’, why do we? Why can’t we just access something without trying to be diverted to another page? Well on the internet now a days, this can seem impossible.

As I have already mentioned, some contributing factors to the decisions I make when dealing with the abundance of information online can vary. Depending on which situation I am in, I will deal with these decisions differently. Although we could go into detail when talking about the contributing factors for each decision such as what mood we are in, where we are at, who we are with, what time it is, or even what we have planned for the future or perhaps purchased therefore leading to certain responsibilities. For example, I have recently put money into buying a car therefore cant afford… well anything haha! So, since I cant afford to be spending money on things I don’t need, I have been avoiding clothing websites because I know I’ll just see nice things and want them, so as a choice when information about sales etc on clothes websites pop up at the side, I have been ignoring them. Therefore, when considering each factor of our decisions, it goes a lot deeper than what it may seem.

In terms of our group project, information overload is applicable to our topic which is News, Evidence and memory in online communications. Especially the area I will be covering which is Evidence in relation to social media and online in general. There is so much information online about everything; ourselves, who we are, what we do, where we live, who we are friends with, where we go, and the list could go on… This information is so easily accessed too which can be alarming, we also need to consider who may be accessing our information and what for. My group did have a problem trying to decide on which areas we would all cover although after talking in class and to the other group we did conclude on what categories we would cover. As the wikibook page constantly needs to be checked, updated and discussed there is a lot of time and effort which goes into it, although to help with this workflow I have tried to come up with a plan on what I will cover and some areas to research in relation to my topic which helps me think about the task at hand. Of course this is group work and we need to keep in touch regarding work and ideas until the deadline therefore my group also has a chat on Facebook messenger to keep each other updated.

In conclusion, there is definitely a lot of information online which will only grow and grow whether it be academic information or social information. Although I do think it can be a choice whether to become distracted while online, as I have explained it just depends on our situation. But yes, the internet does a great job of providing us with information we need, and even information we don’t.

Reference: Paragraph 3- Turkle, Sherry (2011) Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less From Each Other. New York: Basic Books ArianneStirling (discuss • contribs) 01:34, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Class Comments:
comment #1

Hi there, in your post you mentioned how you have been avoiding clothing websites because of your car and I thought that was a good point in terms of self-restraint. You have ultimate control over what you look at, and you're removing the temptation by avoiding certain websites. I thought this was really interesting as I think this line of reasoning can be applied to times before the internet too. If someone was saving up for a car, they would avoid luxury shopping and stick to frugal spending. I suppose it's ultimately up to the person how they maintain self control (I know some people find it harder than others to restrain themselves from impulse buying), which is the same concept as working on a project or an essay and removing the distracting devices and focusing on work. Good luck with the Wiki project! EmilymDaniel (discuss • contribs) 13:48, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

comment #2

Hi! I really like your insights into your own habits in regards to the overload of information and how it can distract you, or anyone. I found your reflection about list about being distracted, very interesting, but also very relatable. Its interesting to see how different habits exist between so many of us - most of the time we are probably unaware of it. I feel at times when I wake up, or have been in a class, or anytime I havent been on my phone for a while, quite overwhelming when I see a screen of notifications to catch up on. The notes and points you make about the academic research are really insightful too. You make draw parallels between the work on the course and your own habits with regards to the wikibook. The points you make about how much information and evidence of our identities online is a very complex topic and also one of the most interesting so I am looking forward to reading more about it. Overall the points you make are relatable and also very insightful as you are able to consciously study your habits and how you interact with the overload of information that is here right at our fingertips. Aidancc (discuss • contribs) 09:46, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #4: Wikibook project reflective account
In relation to sharing resources, ideas and feedback with my classmates, I found that wiki helped to achieve this. As an overall experience I found it difficult to navigate wikibooks, although with the help of the “Wiki Mark up” page, it helped me understand the layout more and how to insert images etc. As much as I usually don’t enjoy working in groups due to everyone taking a different approach to work, I found this project different as we chose our own topics we would cover and left to carry out our own research but still keeping each other updated. The use of the discussion page definitely helped us communicate with each other and keep each other in the loop when planning our wiki project although at times this was harder than originally imagined. A couple of reasons for this is:


 * most of our group talked over “Facebook messenger” with relation to the project rather than on the discussion page which made it look like we weren’t preparing very much.
 * We found that our ideas were starting to collide with each other which led us to a stand still until we figured out which approach to take. Although we all agreed it was difficult for our topics not to overlap in a certain way as every topic on the module can be intertwined in some way.

The use of the actual user page where we inserted our project was a different story, as we had our own sections, carried out our own research and worked on it ourselves. In the end before the deadline, we made sure everyone was finished and if they needed help, as previously mentioned, this information isn’t on the discussion page as everyone was talking on messenger. Although in the end we helped each other with the referencing system so that the page looked neat and tidy.

In terms of working as a group, we had our meetings during the computer lab sessions unless someone needed help, otherwise we contacted each other through messenger. My groups approach was once we had chosen our topics we got on with our own work and updated each other on what we were doing, which area we were covering, which authors we would mention along with examples or stories regarding our research so that we knew not to talk about the same thing. A main reason for taking this approach was because everyone in my group had different knowledge of different topics, for example. I was able to talk about Evidence in relation to social media while someone else found this difficult, but easier to talk about News and the government which I would have been totally lost in. Therefore I feel that although my group could have communicated more through wiki, this approach suited us best.

I found the concept of Always On relatable to the task because it helped me think deeper into the topic and provided new ways of thinking about the task at hand. With relation to technology, it is ubiquitous; meaning it’s everywhere and so familiar that it’s invisible to us, we don’t even notice it anymore. I feel like we can relate this to Wikipedia. We don’t realise how many topics and areas of study as well as every day common interests are available on Wikipedia to increase our knowledge. We are so used to the web and just typing in whatever we want to find out and getting an answer within seconds we don’t actually think about how much information is made available to us by the click of a button due to researchers always being always online continuously updating information.

The idea that we are constantly connected; in a state of persistent, semi-permanent connectivity is major in the concept of ‘Always-on.’ Danah Boyd states we are ‘’“tethered”’’ to the technologies we consume.

Although we could disagree with this. We could look at it in a way where it is how we communicate with our friends. “Sherry Turkle” also states ‘’ ‘those little devices in our pockets are so psychologically powerful, that they don’t only change what we do, they change who we are.’ ‘’

This is in some ways similar to the I/Me Distinctions. It also links to “McLuhan” work where he thinks technology has the power to shape a sense of who we are which leads to a very powerful argument to engage with. We could possible relate this to wiki as well. As part of the assignment was to continuously upload new information and research everywhere therefore ‘Always-on’?

In conclusion I feel that at times the project was rather vague and quite hard to stay on track although overall it was a good experience. I also feel that the concept of ‘Always-On’ as well as some other concepts throughout the module, helped me gain an intellectual insight into collaborative knowledge building and peer-review process during the project.

ArianneStirling (discuss • contribs) 07:36, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Content (weighted 20%)
The Introduction to this chapter is rather odd – it includes user signatures which do not belong on the book page. A couple of sentences as contribs from different users, with very different styles, and this creates a jarring, almost Brechtian feel to the start of the chapter – I can’t imagine that this is deliberate, but I may be incorrect about this. There is little evidence to suggest that this effect serves a critical function for the remainder of the chapter.

Very unusual way of citing sources in-text. However, there is something really useful about including live links to actual reading – it engages the reader in proper hypertext reading, and arguably makes a lot of the platform, its functionality, and how it can be used as a knowledge-building peer-assisted learning platform. This seems deliberate, and works!

Some problems with links that appear red (i.e. not live) and one or two typos dotted throughout.

The section “Evidence and the Unreliability of Online Sources” is a little text-heavy. It’s a fairly heavy-going section to read. Use of wiki commons images to illustrate the argument would help to not only break up the text, but to make more of the platform’s functionality. The following section on “Evidence Available Online and in Social Media” is problematic – there are a few assertions that do not make anything of available conceptual frameworks to build an argument, and entire paragraphs drawing from a source (Mayfield) that go to a dead link. Additionally, whole chucks of text seem superfluous to the overall drive of the chapter, or seem anecdotal or conversational, rather than forming a critically-engaged argument. Finally, in this section, there seems to be an overreliance on a superficial pros vs. cons presentation – this is rarely if ever a good idea because such structures fail to engage the very tensions at the heart of the conceptual framework (in this case – notions of security, and age appropriate context).

Some very useful sections on photojournalism and citizen journalism. There is some repetition of work found in other chapters – a more deliberative, joined-up approach would have enabled you to add interwiki links to a number of relevant places in the wikibook, thereby considerably improving the book overall (e.g. the subsection on “theories” mentions Habermas – where critical theory, the Frankfurt School, and aspects of public sphere are discussed at length in other parts of the book).

The glossary is rather short! The reference list is worryingly so. Some very useful reading and research in evidence, but at this level, and with this number of students working on the project over a period of 3+ weeks, one would expect more.


 * Satisfactory. Your contribution to the book page gives a satisfactory brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a fair range of concepts associated with your subject, and an effort to deliver critical definitions. There is evidence that you draw from relevant literature and scholarship, however your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is slightly lost, perhaps due to a variable depth of understanding the subject matter or over reliance on rote learning. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a somewhat circumscribed range and depth of subject matter.

Wiki Exercise Portfolio (Understanding weighted 30%)
Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is overall (and particularly in relation to Understanding and Engagement elements), that should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band, relative to the descriptor


 * Good. Among other things, good entries will make a clear point in a clear way. They will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. They 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). They may also demonstrate a broader understanding of the module's themes and concerns, and are likely to show evidence of reading and thinking about the subject material. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.


 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of critical engagement with set materials, featuring discriminating command of a good range of relevant materials and analyses
 * evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material to a fairly wide degree
 * Argument and analysis:
 * well-articulated and well-supported argument through judgement relating to key issues, concepts or procedures
 * evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position);
 * evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections);
 * clear evidence of independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content suggests deficient standard of engagement (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * discernible lack of engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Lacking in reflexive and creative use of discussion pages