User talk:Bojackpopsocket

My name is Veronica, I'm from the United States, and I'm using Wikibooks for a class project. Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 13:44, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1: Online Visibility and Footprint
When I think about my online visibility and footprint the first thing that comes to my mind is all the social media and online platforms that I'm apart of. I have a Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr, LinkdIn, VSCO, and Reddit. Of course, there are probably others that I have forgotten about, but these are my most popular platforms. Given all the social media and online platforms that I use I would say that I'm pretty visible online, which as I type this sounds very scary given I'm a shy person in real life.

I think my online visibility takes form in many different aspects, which include: sending/liking/retweeting a Tweet, uploading/sharing/liking a Facebook status, posting/liking a picture on Instagram, and sending messages or commenting. I would also imagine there is quite a lot of information about myself online. By scrolling through my online platforms you can find out my first and last name, age, birthday, where I went to high school, where I go to college, where I have and currently work, where I was born, where I live, people I'm friends with, different things I like and dislike, and my location.

Aside from my Facebook, most of my social media is "public". In regard to my Facebook, that account is private and I only accept or allow friends and family members to be my friend. This is because I use Facebook as a place to stay in touch with friends and family members who I might not see very often, but still want to share my life with. I also view Facebook as more a "private" social media platform due in part to the nature of the content I share and who I allow to be my friend. With my other online platforms, they're viewable to anyone. The reasoning behind this is because I see them as more "public" social media platforms and that if you really want to engage with other users then you have to have them set to "public."

Take Twitter, if something is trending and I want to join that conversation it's much easier for me to do so if my account is "public" because then others can see, like, and retweet it. Like Meikle and Graham state, "the initial post is, on a very small scale, an example of the broadcast model of communication - what Thompson (1995) calls 'mediated quasi-interaction'.It is addressed to no one in particular. There is no specific imagined audience, beyond the set of everyone who can see my posts on Facebook" (Meikle and Graham, 2016, p.19). This relates to my point about Twitter because I have never crafted a Tweet (unless I @ someone) and thought beforehand 'I hope so-and-so see this'. I don't think a private Twitter would have much social engagement which defeats the purpose? As for my other social platforms, I don't really think I'm too conscious about whether those accounts are "private" or "public".

Meikle and Graham also similarly comment on this in their book. "Again and again the convergence of public and personal is the problem - not least in being able to tell which is public and which is private. 'You can't say that the photos on someone else's Facebook site were posted specifically for you to see, but neither can you say they weren't. Once there, they are part of your social life'(Miller 2011: 171)" (Meikle and Graham, 2016, p.20). This relates to my own posts because while myself or someone might post a picture or update we don't always have the attention nor necessarily think about it reaching an audience of the whole world. Which then gets backs into the notion of making one's profile "private" or "public" and begs the question of just how "private" or "public" is one's account? Although, by setting your social media platform(s) to "private" seems like they're trying to hide something, which now that I think more about it's not entirely true because I suppose there are people out there that just don't want to the entire world to see what they're doing nor do I think the entire world necessarily has to or wants to see everything -- aside from celebrities maybe? This relates to a point Danah Boyd makes when she writes "ironically, the publicness of social media also provides privacy in new ways. Many of those who embrace the public aspects of social media find that the more public they are, the more they can carve off privacy. When people assume you share everything, they don’t ask you about what you don’t share"(Boyd, 2012, p. 76). From my own personal experience, I do find this point to be true and that it fits nicely into my earlier posed question of just how "private" and "public" are people's accounts.

In regard to how much my information is under my control, I suppose that most of it is at least until I post it. Once it has been posted it's pretty much out there on "the Internet" forever. I feel that a lot of my information might theoretically be under my control, but I also don't have any idea how and what others are able to do with all the information. John B. Thompson has a more pessimistic point of view. He writes that "In this new world of mediated visibility, the making visible of actions and events is not just the outcome of leakage in systems of communication and information flow that are increasingly difficult to control: it is also an explicit strategy of individuals who know very well that mediated visibility can be a weapon in the struggles they wage in their day-to-day lives" (Thompson, 2004, p. 31).

Although, I don't really care about what they might be doing with my information. I feel that if others are "controlling" my information I would at least want them to be transparent about it otherwise it seems suspicious. I also don't think I'm "techy" smart enough to truly understand or comprehend how much of my information is under my control. I'm also not really sure how I could about knowing just how much of my information is and isn't under my control. Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 22:36, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Instructor 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 the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall:


 * Excellent. Among other things, these entries will probably demonstrate a complex, critical understanding of the themes of the module. They will communicate very effectively, making excellent and creative use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons), and may be written with some skill and flair. They will address the assignment tasks in a thoughtful way. They will make insightful connections between original examples and relevant concepts. They will be informed by serious reading and reflection, are likely to demonstrate originality of thought, and will probably be rewarding and informative for the reader. The wiki markup formatting will be impeccable.


 * This work is at the lower end of this grade band (but still, excellent work!), 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 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 achieved an “Excellent” grade outright, were it not for the fact that you went excessively over the word limit. Please read the instructions which state that you need to “address each exercise brief specifically. It is also important to be concise in online writing, so try to keep your posts to no more than around 2500-3000 characters each” Unless other wise stated.


 * Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. It’s really good that you’ve already started experimenting with images and so on though. Well done so far on that. I suspect that, if you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this will make a considerable difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are especially good. I like that you have framed some of your responses as questions to solicit discussion (this is, arguably, what discussion pages are all about!) and also that you have engaged in discussion in an open and critical way (that is to say, you've responded to what other people are saying and are contributing meaningfully to discussion - arguably the civic element of wiki that you ought to be thinking about, which you clearly are). Keep this up!

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1: Comments
I find what you are saying about Twitter to be very interesting. I agree that it is significantly easier to engage if you account is public and that a private Twitter account would likely not have much social engagement. However, I think it is important to recognize that people use social media platforms in different ways. This is a point that is illustrated by Ethan Tussey in his chapter of Connected Viewing: Selling, Streaming & Sharing in the Digital Era by Jennifer Holt and Kevin Sanson, where he studied how his students utilized connected viewing apps and discovered that his students often used connected viewing apps in different ways that media conglomerates had intended (Tussey, 2011, p. 209). I feel that Tussey's observation is applicable to the use of social media as the way in which people use different social media platforms has evolved since their creation and does not always reflect the way in which they are intended to be used. I personally use Twitter to see how people are reacting to what is happening in the world and keep up to date with less serious things (gifs that are trending, amusing Twitter threads, etc.) However, my engagement with Twitter tends to be limited to just liking or retweeting tweets and I very rarely tweet anything myself, so I often have my account on private. The main reason that I have my account on private is because many companies search for the social media accounts of potential employees and I do not want my potential employers to get a bad impression of me because they do not agree with something I retweeted or liked.

I really enjoyed the way in which you address the issues of "public" or "private" accounts on social media and whether accounts truly are "public" or "private". I agree that the idea of a “private” account almost caries a negative connotation, however people set their social media accounts to private because they do not want the entire world to have a glimpse of their life, not because they are necessarily trying to hide anything.

Finally, if you are interested in learning more about how Facebook and other companies use your data there are a few sections under the settings section of Facebook that can provide you with some more information. If you go to ‘Access Your Information’ and then ‘Advertisers Who Uploaded a Contract List With Your Information’ you can see a list of companies that have used your information (email, phone number, etc.) to find your social media account and advertise to you or companies that have purchased your information. While some of these companies might seem random (I always have random car dealerships in places I’ve never been appear on this list) you will probably recognize some of them as companies from which you have made purchases or with whom you have an account. There is also a section entitled 'Managing Your Data & Submitting Objections" that can help you learn more about how Facebook and any other platform owned by Facebook uses your data. Martiparti15 (discuss • contribs) 12:08, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

I indeed have many of the same social media accounts as you. I do actively partake in all of these social medias as you do such as posting, scrolling, retweeting. liking, and commenting. Social media usage takes up an active amount of time in one's life and I am highly perceptible to this as well. You left a valid question on my post about being study abroad students and how we are posting more than living in the moment. I do believe that is a great and valid point. But I also believe that I am living in the moment, but I am also capturing those moments through a lense. I share these pictures, memories, and moments for my friends and family members to see my journey throughout the world. In comparison to your accounts, all of my social media accounts are private. I believe in only allowing people I know and trust have access to my identity. I see your point that you find Instagram and Twitter to be more public platforms and I think that is due to the large amounts of celebrity influence on these platforms. Celebrities are public and verified and you have easy access to their lives. I like your point that "private" accounts are not negative. I am private not to hide, but to protect my personal privacy from random strangers. Especially, with the Pyramid Schemes being such an active attack on social media. Remaining safe and less annoyed by my social media accounts is ideal. One point I would like to make is that no matter if you are private or not potential employers have access to viewing your remarks on social media. Human Resources is very powerful. I advise that you be careful about the content you share and like. Cornelius06 (discuss • contribs) 14:39, 3 March 2019 (UTC)Cornelius06

Wiki Exercise #2: To what extent are my online and offline identities aligned?
For the most part, I believe that the way I present myself online pretty accurately reflects who I am. Although, if I am being honest I wouldn’t say my “online self” and “in real life (IRL) self” match 100 percent. This notion relates to Jean Burgess, Alice E. Marwick, and Thomas Poell (2017) when they write “these socially-oriented performances must carry meaning for multiple publics and audiences without sacrificing one’s true sense of self” (p. 354). This relates to my own IRL and online self because while I’m “performing” online, I’m also not steering too far or “sacrificing” my “true sense of self.” I am a generally shy person, whereas online I think I find myself to have a bit more freedom and that I am more active or “outspoken” per se. I think that it is easier for me to say something or Tweet a bunch of things in a given day than I might actually say or talk about online. For example, I might Tweet or Retweet something about feminism, but IRL I probably wouldn’t stand up on the same platform or stool as loudly in comparison to my online self.



I would also say my personalities online and IRL also differs when it comes to how much I share with strangers. IRL I probably wouldn’t say or share half of the things I post about and share online. Online I dump a lot of my life (my travel pictures, gut reactions, feelings, etc) in a Tweet, Instagram, or Facebook post, which apart from my Facebook account are all public.

I would say a noticeable aspect where both my online and IRL self are similar is in respect to my compassion and respectfulness. I wouldn’t say that I am intentionally hateful or rude to anyone IRL or online, which I am proud to say because I know or have heard of people who could be kind IRL and hateful online which is strange and says a lot about their personality.

I also think that as we age our identities, IRL and online do change. I think this idea is pretty easy to understand because the older we get the more we learn about the world and ourselves and how we want ourselves to be portrayed to others IRL and online. For example, there are definitely some things I posted online in middle school that I look back on now and laugh at because I would never post that same thing now that I am in college. Since first using social media and creating my “online” self back in middle school I believe that I have become more aware of what I post. I have also become more mature and have a better understanding of how to and not to portray myself online (what is and isn’t acceptable).

I believe that while we might have a “main” identity, that ultimately we have and perform different identities depending on who we are around. I know that there are certain ways that I act around one group of people that I wouldn’t do around another and vise versa. I think that this is definitely transferable to our online identity as well, which add to the number of identities we show to the world.

Zizi Papacharissi (2010) talks about this in their book when they write, “New media...allow[s] people the opportunity to present various forms of themselves to others at a distance. While people are purportedly presenting themselves, they are presenting a highly selective version of themselves. Social network sites (SNSs) present the latest networked platform enabling self-presentation to a variety of interconnected audiences” (p. 252). This relates to my point because Papacharissi is saying that social media has allowed us to have and present different identities based on each SNS we use and its subsequent audience. Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 11:43, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2 Comments

 * Having read your research into the topic of the online and offline self I have found that your insight into the notion the the IRL self and online can be different and that as we age how we act online changes is quite relevant and does offer up an insight into the constantly changing means of social media and communication. I have also found that your academic references are academically sound and shows the development of how self presentation has developed more due to the influence of social media's. Atari Darren (discuss • contribs) 12:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Wow! Great piece and very insightful - good use of citations too. Well done!--MandrakeShepherd (discuss • contribs) 10:49, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Hey Bojackpopsocket, you definitely make some very interesting points in your essay. Looking at one's online-self as a 'performance' by the offline-self is definitely a very intriguing point of view. The only problem that might arise if you look at it that way, could be when to draw a line between performing a 'true to you' online-self and a completely new character. You also make an important point in mentioning how both our online and offline self change with age - if I think back to what kind of stuff I posted back when I was 13.. a lot has changed.

JuliaWearsAScarf (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Interesting piece of contribution to this debate overall. in your piece I find some similarities with myself. Your contribution is informative and I was happy to see you touch on the personality aspect of who you are in real life (IRL) and who you are in your online identity. It is commendable that you observe the need to be consistent in your overall good nature as many people use their online identities as a way to be bullies and rather mean to others and also spread negative content. You seem to have enjoyed this exercise and incorporated links to wiki commons and other external sources. I am also thrilled to observe your other contributions to the entry discussions for the group project. You display a good sense of involvement and team participation. Best wishes in all you endeavors and may you continue enjoying your time studying in Scotland; this will inevitably inspire your online identity for others to see. AuthenticEnough (discuss • contribs) 21:09, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

I really like the pictures you have chosen, they help to tie your point together well! I agree with your point that our identities definitely accommodate to where we are and who we are with (or online audience). I wanted to ask you for your view on this, since you mentioned that there is an interaction between our IRL and online selves and that we have that "main" identity in real life, do you think that in the future due to increasing interaction with the internet world that would shift? Do you think it is possible that in some point the line would become so blurred that our online identity would become the "main" identity and therefore start affecting your real life identity? Overall I really enjoyed reading your view on this specifically because you gave elaborate examples directly from your experience. Digitaldagmar (discuss • contribs) 08:51, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

I agree that our age alters our identities online and in real life significantly. Many times I have scrolled through my timeline on Facebook and deleted old photos that I though were cute or funny at the time but are now SO cringey. I feel that as we grow our experience shape who we are and alter our identities and opinions dramatically. Sometimes we even post things that we vehemently disagree with now, but at the time thought were great or funny. A prime example of this would be James Gunn, director of Guardians of the Galaxy. Years ago he joked about rape, pedophilia, and child abuse on Twitter in an incredibly disrespectful way. However, he publicly condemned the statements he had Tweeted previously, saying they were no longer reflective of who he is today or who he has been for years.

I agree with your statement that we perform different identities based on who we are around and your connection to our performances online. I think this ties in really well to Grant Bollmer's idea of contexts in Theorizing Digital Cultures, and how we change who we are because of who we imagine may be watching us (2018, p.119). How we act around our friends on a night our will differ from how we act while at dinner with our parents similarly to how what we post on our Snapchat story (that our parents cannot see) is different than what we post on Facebook (which they can see).

Wiki Exercise #3: Annotated Bibliography Exercise (Part B)
Chen, D., Heyer, S., Ibbotson, S., Salonitis, K., Steingrímsson, J. G., & Thiede, S. (2015). Direct digital manufacturing: Definition, evolution, and sustainability implications. Journal of Cleaner Production, 107, 615-625. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.009

In this article, scholars Danfang Chen, Steffen Heyer, Suphunnika Ibbotson, Konstantinos Salonitis, J on Garðar Steingrímsson, and Sebastian Thiede discuss and explore the environmental sustainability of direct digital manufacturing (DDM). They refer to examples such as 3D printers throughout their paper and case study. They look into the impacts that DDM could have on society as a whole but mainly in respect to three aspects; social, economic, and environmental. They note that due to the significant decrease in the cost of DDM, there has been an increase in the use of them for the production of non-industrial applications. In this case, the definition of sustainability is taken from Brundtland (1987). “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” This study noted that DDM has been found to decrease waste, resulting in decreased energy use, pollution, and carbon footprint due to its less complex processing. They conclude by noting that there is still much more research that needs to be done in order to look further into the environmental impacts of DDM in relation to the pre and post production from the DDM processes. Overall, this article is useful to our theme because it provides a specific case study of a digital media (3D printers) and the sustainability of it. This is ultimately helpful because it gives us further insight into just how sustainability digital media is. Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 11:05, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #4: Collaborative Essay Critical Evaluation – What ARE Wikis?
When I think of Wikis I think of an open learning collaborative platform. I would describe Wikis as a community of people are work together to provide knowledge about various things for the greater good of the world. Wiki emphasis visibility because anyone can create an account, add something, and collaborate with the greater Wiki community and all their actions are visible either through their signature via 4 ~’s or IP address if they do not sign their contributions. By emphasizing visibility, Wiki allows its users to feel important in the work they are doing. This relates to when Graham Meikle (2016) writes about social media and visibility in his book. “In principle: can say or make things; can share the things that they and others have said and made; and can make all of this saying, making and sharing visible to others” (pp.ix-x). Even though he is writing about visibility on social media, and Wiki is not a social media platform, I still find Meikle’s point to be relatable because there are still connections between the ideas that users on both platforms are connecting and collaborating with one another just in slightly different ways.

Wikis can also be used to help facilitate collaborative research in several ways. For example, from our collaborative essay project, at least 12 students had to work together to come up with one cohesive essay on the given theme. Throughout the project, we had to discuss and divide up work by replying to and helping each other. Because anyone can edit and use Wiki, this easily facilitates collaborative research among users. Wikibooks fosters a community by allowing users to collaborate and add or fix entries on a certain topic found on Wiki. This creates and fosters a community because the Wiki users are coming together in a common space and for a common interest which Robyn Bateman Driskell and Larry Lyon (2002) would describe as criteria for fostering a community (p.374). Ways in which online collaborations represent a digital commons includes the notion that all the users contributing are donating their work for free which according to Ursula Huws (2015) is the definition of a “creative commons” (p.173).

Wiki platforms partially offer a potential form online emancipation because I find the notion of full online emancipation not possible. According to the English Oxford Diction definition, emancipation is “The fact or process of being set free from legal, social, or political restrictions; liberation” (Emancipation). and based on what I know about Wiki platforms I don’t think emancipation is fully possible because even within Wiki there are still a set of rules and guidelines that users should follow if they want to continue to contribute to the platform. Although, I think in the grand scheme of online platforms, Wiki does allow for some potential of emancipation because users are technically allowed to type what they will (in accordance to the small set of rules). Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 19:44, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello there ! The idea of the wiki being an open learning collaborative platform, this has been greatly seen in the work done in the wikibook project as I certainly have learned more about my topic from collaborating with others. Your use of showing how wikis show their visibility is very good and one which I did not expect to see. You are very correct in your statements that “all their actions are visible either through their signature via 4 ~’s or IP address” this in turn helps the overall security of the site and insures that the work that is presented is correct (as moderators can easily see who has tampered with certain works). I did not however think about how the signing off of things makes the writer feel important, although i certainly do agree with you as there is a certain amount of pride when a piece is completed that you as a writer have taken part in.

I would agree that wiki’s are not a social media platform but could it be considered a social platform due to the connected nature between collaborators ? Although your use of Meikle is perfect as many of the points that he makes in his work on social media blends perfectly with those seen in the Wikibooks and its sister sites.

Furthermore, your use of the class wiki project is perfect in showcasing the collaborative nature of the Wikibooks and its sister sites. I would agree in your point that “Because anyone can edit and use Wiki, this easily facilitates collaborative research among users”, I certainly would say that I found this during the class wiki-book project. However, it could be argued that this also detriments collaboration as thanks to everyone being able to focus on what they want sometimes clashes between people with differing or similar ideas happen.

Your ideas of Wikibooks being a form of creative commons is well backed up with quotes to back up your own opinions, which I agree with. The community within Wikibooks could be argued to be the most important thing in the site if not for this then potentially there would not be as many pages or as many researched areas.

Finally, I agree with your ideas of online emancipation in regards to Wikibooks. There is no way that full online emancipation could be possible on the site due to the strict set of rules and regulations that users are required to follow. However, I agree that the site has a form of limited emancipation due to users being able to input what they want. This could be argued against however as if what the user has written is found to be incorrect then the user can be penalised and even banned by the site. JackLeslie1999 (discuss • contribs) 12:24, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello ! I found your point about wikis fostering community to be really compelling. Whenever I think of online platforms fostering community I tend to think of communities on Facebook and other forms of social media, where users are encouraged to create groups based on interests or common needs. Therefore your application of the concept of fostering of communities to wikis was a very new idea to me. However, I think it is absolutely spot on. After completing the Wikibooks project, it is very clear how wikis can foster a sense of community. While these communities differ from the ones I mentioned earlier, they are still a common place where people can collaborate and contribute, however in this case it is to achieve a common goal and as you mentioned "to provide knowledge about various things for the greater good of the world".

Additionally, I like your integration of Graham Meikle's view, from his book Social Media: Communication, Sharing and Visibility, and agree that wikis are not forms of social media. However, I also really enjoy 's view that they could be considered social platforms even if they are not social media platforms, due to their collaborative nature that fact that they essentially require users to communicate with one another.

I also felt that you drew a fantastic connection between wikis and digital commons. Prior to reading this I knew what digital commons and wikis were and how they operated but reading your analysis helped me clearly connect the two and understand how both wikis and digital commons provide users with information that has been freely contributed.

I find your analysis of online emancipation quite interesting as I had always thought of online emancipation as referring to freeing oneself from the internet, not necessarily one being able to freely express themselves on the internet, or in this case wikis. For the most part I agree with your assessment that wiki platforms emancipation is not fully achievable on wiki platforms, however I think this is common of not just wikis but most online platforms where users can contribute in some way, such as social media platforms. Facebook, for example has community standards that protect against violence, criminal behavior, and objectionable content and respect intellectual property. Twitter has rules and policies created to protect against hateful conduct as well as copyright and trademark infringement. Even Wordpress, a content management system where users can build their own websites and are encouraged to freely express themselves has user guidelines that prevent users from posting illegal content, intellectual property infringement, harmful content, and a plethora of other things. While I support the guidelines provided by these platforms, as they are intended protect people, I think the only way that a person could freely express themselves online, would be on a self-hosted website, where they would not be affected by community standards or users policies (regardless of whether the policies would affect the content anyway). Martiparti15 (discuss • contribs) 12:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #4 Comments
Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 14:04, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: ENGAGEMENT ON DISCUSSION PAGES & CONTRIBS
Grade descriptors for Engagement: Engagement on discussion pages, and contribs of this standard attain the following grade descriptor. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular response to the brief, this descriptor will give you a clearer idea of how the grade you have been given relates to the standards and quality expected of work at this level:
 * Satisfactory. Among other things, satisfactory contributions 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) and will have little justification for ideas offered on Discussion Pages. The wiki markup formatting will need some work.

As instructed in the labs, and outlined in the assessment brief documentation, students should be engaging at least once a day, for the duration of the project. The following points illustrate how this engagement is evaluated.

Evidence from contribs to both editing and discussion of content (i.e. volume and breadth of editorial activity as evidenced through ‘contribs’). These are primarily considered for quality rather than quantity, but as a broad guideline:
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 3000+ characters are deemed “considerable”
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 2000+ characters are deemed “significant”
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 1000+ characters are deemed “substantial”
 * Items on a contribs list that are <1000 characters are important, and are considered in the round when evaluating contribs as a whole because of their aggregate value

Overall:
 * A large number of small-ish contribs through the project period, which increased in frequency during the week before deadline. Amongst contribs were a smaller number that could be considered as substantial, and the annotation entries were especially useful.

Engagement with and learning from the community on Discussion Pages
 * Evidence of peer-assisted learning and collaboration
 * Good
 * Evidence of reading, sharing, and application of research to the essay
 * Good
 * Evidence of peer-review of others’ work
 * Good

Reflexive, creative and well-managed use of Discussion Pages
 * Good
 * Clearly labelled sections and subsections
 * Good
 * Contributions are all signed
 * Good

Civility. Your conduct is a key component of any collaboration, especially in the context of an online knowledge-building community. Please respect others, as well as observe the rules for civility on wiki projects. All contribs are moderated.
 * Excellent

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly correspond to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall:


 * Excellent. Among other things, these entries will probably demonstrate a complex, critical understanding of the themes of the module. They will communicate very effectively, making excellent and creative use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons), and may be written with some skill and flair. They will address the assignment tasks in a thoughtful way. They will make insightful connections between original examples and relevant concepts. They will be informed by serious reading and reflection, are likely to demonstrate originality of thought, and will probably be rewarding and informative for the reader. The wiki markup formatting will be impeccable.


 * This work is at the lower end of this grade band (which is nonetheless a high grade band!), so there’s perhaps a little room for improvement here. 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 criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Your Ex2 is really very good.


 * Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, if you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this would make a difference, and it seems clear that you did find a way to get creative with this element.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are very good. I like that you have framed some of your responses as questions to solicit discussion (this is, arguably, what discussion pages are all about!) and also that you have engaged in discussion in an open and critical way (that is to say, you've responded to what other people are saying and are contributing meaningfully to discussion - arguably the civic element of wiki that you ought to be thinking about, which you clearly are). Well done.

General:
 * Reading and research: evidence of critical engagement with set materials; evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material – all very good.


 * Argument and analysis: well-articulated and well-supported argument; 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); evidence of independent critical ability – all good.


 * Presentation: good use of wiki markup and organisational skills.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 16:33, 1 May 2019 (UTC)