User talk:Charleneabeana

Hello Friends! I am taking part of a class project, and we are working on a wikibook. We are exploring different aspects of digital media and culture. This project involves us contributing and editing online. Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC) Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1 What Makes a Good Wiki
In recent years, I have started to use online collaboration more and more. Using things such as google docs, social media and blogs allow for a flow of information and communication between users. I use google docs if I am working on a group project because it allows us to easily edit and gather our information. Blogging is something I became involved with when I was in high school and still dabble with. It started with a tumblr where I never blogged original content- only "reblogging" angsty posts about being a teenager and cats or something of that nature. In the later part of my high school career and throughout college I relaunched a blog that focused on my experiences and political opinions. The content was not particularly involved at first, but over time developed a structure and tone that I still incorporate into other media platforms. I also helped run the social media pages of a friends DIY music label. I didn't know a great deal about that type of music, but did understand how to gain a following online and how to keep constantly posting content. The blog page I ran for them focused heavily on visuals, mostly Polaroid pictures of shows the various artists were performing followed by a text post providing a set list, date, time and location of the event. The producers and artists would very often write "how to" posts, personal experiences and different opinions and reviews of music. Managing this platform was some of the most fun I had online, and I also learned a great deal about hip-hop, DIY, rap and music production. I've definitely been sucked into the social media vortex. I have facebook, twitter, tumblrs, and instagram accounts. I've been putting a lot of focus on instagram as of late. I run my personal account, a food account and a finsta. My food account, or "foodstagram" is the most fun. I highlight local businesses in my community, write reviews and recommendations regarding the establishments I frequent. Utilizing hashtags brings me a lot of different viewers for my content and that's mainly how I expand and follower base. I have a lot of small businesses, news outlets, tourist pages and prominent members of my community following my food account and very often they repost or bring attention to my photos. I've gotten free meals and have been asked if my photos maybe used on community blogs or on the pages of the businesses. Having such open and accessible platforms allows for the flow of information to pass from user to user, producer to consumer, and so on. I've learned a lot from working with others through managing a blog for a small music label. I've unexpectedly developed a network through instagram with different community resources and small businesses that I could have never imagined. I'm not entirely sure if this is what qualifies as online collaborations, but theses are experiences I've had that would not have been possible without the media and the internet. Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 11:38, 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, 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. In addition, you haven't really commented on the specificities of wiki collaborative platforms (although I have to say the discussion of your experience is quite detailed, and there is a lot of scope to develop this to reflect upon the natureof collaborating during the course of the project).


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – none undertaken. This would effectively halve your mark in an assessed context. Surprising considering your experience in online collaboration!


 * oh and... is there such a thing as a free lunch? Perhaps something to think about in relation to this week's (Week 5) theme....

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:16, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #2: Visibility and Data Trails
Who am I, and Who do they see? It is difficult to not be visible online. Even when you're offline, you're still online. It could be someone including you in a post, or you have left an electronic fingerprint just by lurking on the internet. I personally am more visible online than I want to be. Being present on various social media platforms does not allow one to remain anonymous to the world. Even without a social media presence, it is difficult to not have an online identity. What you purchase online is archived, where you go to school, where you live, what events you've attended, if your name has been published anywhere, these are all accessible on the internet if you want it to be or not. Although it seems impossible to be completely anonymous online, you do have some control over how much of yourself is out there. You control what you post, what you like and where all of this happens.

Media Platforms offer some privacy features. For example, instagram profiles may be public or private. Public profiles allow your posts and posts you have been tagged in to be open to the pubic. You have very little control over who sees your content. Private profiles give the user the option of who gets to see their content. These options allow people to be more personal or less personal with their audiences. Showing more of who they are in real life, or maintaining a facade for the internet.

My social media use leaves me exposed. With the exception to my finsta, all of my social media accounts are fairly public. My food instagram, foodstagram, which I highlighted in a previous Wiki post is extremely public and I have set it up in a way that encourages a larger viewing audience. The fact that I have been active on facebook for so long has turned it into a "monster" in my life. I use it as a way to keep in touch with friends and family, post pictures, network and get in contact with people and as a platform to voice my opinion. I often find myself overwhelmed by my activity on social media. I find myself under pressure to produce content or to be vocal. Every few months I do a media purge. I either deactivate or uninstall media apps from my phone. Its a way for me to press set and unplug. Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 20:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC) Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 19:04, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Feedback on Wiki Exercise #2
--Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 23:18, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Charlenabeana, I enjoy reading your wiki exercice! I totally agree with the fact that we couldn't be 100% anonymous online and I think this is an advantage and a disadvantage at the same time. I saw a lot of people on online forums being rude with other users, the anonymity let some users harass people with hateful, racist, xenophobic, homophobic, sexist and vulgar comments. In my opinion, social medias should be regulated as real life, with a proof of identity, age, gender and so on. This regulation could dissuade some people, and stay away from cybercrime and cyberbullying. In a other hand, some honest people want to be anonymous to have more chance to get a job, or to save informations about their private life. --Sarahsarah22 (discuss • contribs) 21:21, 16 February 2017 (UTC)



Hello Charleneabeana,

Why do you think that being active on Facebook for so long has turned it into a monster?

You made a good point with saying that you can feel under pressure to produce content or to be vocal. I have a Facebook account but I don't create much content. Often I don't think that people are interested in stuff that I could post. I realized that people who creating content often like each others posts or pictures just to get a "like" back.

Have you ever tried to "google" yourself?

It can scare you when you realize that even people who don't have an social media account on the same platform can see your content. Even if you delete your account, some data trails will be left behind and it is very difficult to remove them. Because of these data trails you have to be very carefully about how you present yourself on the different platforms. It is easy for possible employers to find your last party pic from the evening you were dancing on the table or stuff like that (Not that such a picture from you exists, just an example.)  And do you know that if you have an google account and that when you logged in with your browser, google is tracking your location? - very scary

--Melissa0908 (discuss • contribs) 23:20, 16 February 2017 (UTC)



Hi Charleneabeana, you make some excellent points here, many of which I agree strongly with. I completely understand the feeling of being more visible than you want to actually be/ intend to be. It's quite interesting to think about how this might affect a user's life offline, as well as online. For example, a prospective employer may need to only type a name or email address into a search engine and produce mountains of data that the user has happily provided. The points that Melissa0908 make are also very interesting - the fact that google track location when signed into chrome with a google account is rather scary, but also should be obvious to us as it seems to know that i want an indian meal in stirling specifically if I just type "indian restaurant" into the search bar. Perhaps this is a bigger issue - that people are aware but are so wrapped up in the advantages and ease of use that handing over data provides, without thinking about the real consequences it could create.

Helizacarr (discuss • contribs) 00:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi there! I love the idea of a media purge- I feel like thats something I should take on board too haha. Personally I feel like social media almost cloggs up and makes feel almost claustrophobic with the amount of information that I'm surrounded with. Its scary how much information loads of websites contain about me, be it signing up for newsletters. I find it interesting how one of your reasons is that you are one year than your peers, particularly as personal a few of my friends are even 7 years older than me (I guess they act a lot younger, however theres still a large age gap!) Your experience being a prime example, I feel like those people who may not have smartphones at all or have very slow ones may feel left out of the social group/ whats going on .. would you agree? I’m a bit of an addict so I know when I had no smartphone I hat3ed it at first, but as soon as I got used to it I loved it, things like Snapchat weren't as important to me as they are when I have my smartphone.

Hgfoster (discuss • contribs) 04:33, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Information Overload
It would be false to say that a part of my anxiety does not come from information overload. I have mentioned in a previous wiki post that I feel bombarded by the information and content available on different social media site. I get sucked into the virtual vortex. How I deal with these situations is by doing a digital purge. I often deactivate or uninstall different platforms and apps. The out of site, out of mind strategy is what I try and go with. The "cleanse" so to speak helps me become less "addicted" to my devices and away from the overload of information. If I am not purging and find myself lost in content, I try and filter information that is uninteresting. For example, I don't care for sports of any kind. I have turned of notifications from news sources if it involves athletics. I hide sports teams from my Facebook news feed. Algorithms that learn my interests frighten me because I feel like then I am limited with the variety of what I see. I decide to filter and even block off certain information, because I'm not too sure how else to do it. I would rather have minimal information/content in front of me to browse and allow myself to seek out information if I become curious about something.

Working on the wikibook has been incredibly challenging. It requires so much time and communication with other people. Mostly people I have never met in my life. Talking though a discussion page and being unfamiliar with wiki format has proven to be challenging. I hate to admit, but working on the wikibook has been a slow moving process. It is not the fault of anyone person, but collectively I think we just underestimated the amount of work it would be. Being apart of a knowledge community and contributing to it has been an interesting learning experience. My group has made a decision to meet up in person and discuss and collaborate on topics we discussed on our talk page. Other people working on our wikichapter have become much more involved recently and seem to be active in helping format and organize out discussion pages. I think with the deadline fast approaching everyone has adapted an "all hands on deck" attitude. Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 23:12, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Feedback on Wiki Exercise #3
Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 23:18, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

I totally agree with your first statement and feel like describing it as a 'vortex' is very accurate. I feel like the way you deal with the sensory overload by doing a digital purge is a better long term way of dealing with it, way better than my way of dealing with it which is just turning off my phone (this way I miss out on a lot of important things and stop replying the middle of conversations, also enviably I have to turn my phone back on and deal with the sensory overload yet again) Its interesting the way that the Wikibook is discussed makes things feel like they're very slow moving to me and also feel like I'm getting nothing done with a long, dragged out back and forth conversation. I feel like I get a lot more done through a quick conversation in person (which defeats the point of discussing through Wikibooks) Hgfoster (discuss • contribs) 16:23, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I strongly advise a digital purge one in a while. It is incredibly grueling at first. The want to look at your phone or check something. It's hard to not have something you can mindlessly stare at. But after a week or two it becomes easy and You don't feel like you are missing out. The discussion pages are good, but they definitely do not replace face to face conversation. I get lost rather easily reading the text on the screen.  Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 10:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Likewise, I share the same views on the Wikibook experience. Especially the conversation element. The wiki group project requires a fair amount of communication to get the required content in place and in order to do so, this is not as straight forward as I hoped through the discussion pages. I feel as though we are all on the same boat when it comes to the Wiki task then. Hence why I find myself engagement points at this hour on a Thursday evening. Good work though guys. Lewislbonar (discuss • contribs) 23:14, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


 * It is so dfficult to keep up with the discussion pages. It isn't like a running chat or a log of what you are doing. I need instant gratification knowing someone has seem what I posted and will respond to it. Wait for other users to contribute is painful. I tend to do my word at odd hours so I always feel like I'm on a different page than the other people in my group. How have you gone about managing the work? Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 10:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

I think your thoughts are interesting and I agree with your comment about people can try and filter information that is uninteresting. And I think it is good to seize the initiative that you can seek out information if you become curious about something and minimal information/content to browse.

I found your comments on Wikibook project particularly interesting. I agree with what you have mentioned about being apart of a knowledge community and contributing is an interesting learning experience. Also, I feel the same that people working on wikichapter have become much more involved and seem to be active in helping each other. Moreover, I think when people discuss the topics and resources together, which is also conducive to information filtering. Because people can share reliable and credible sources with each other, and also reduce repetitive and useless information. What do you think? Shekkkkk (discuss • contribs) 03:20, 3 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I agree that discussing and doing research together is a great way to filter out useless information and is much more efficient, but does that defeat the purpose of the wikbook? We are supposed to learn how to use this platform and contribute information how the rest of the online community wold. How is your group making out with the discussion pages and how have you decided to organize it? Charleneabeana (discuss • contribs) 10:58, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, I think people can also discuss the topics and resources together in the Wikibooks, such as people can talk with each other through the discussion page and share their opinions and then post it on the final website. In my personal opinion, it just changes the way of communication, but it doesn’t change the central idea or purpose of the Wikibook. Besides, in my group, we just talk about the ideas and subtopics in the discussion page, after that each one of us chooses one of the sub-topics and start the research and writes about it. We also post the findings and examples on the discussion page and share our opinions on it, so we can improve and change the contents. Shekkkkk (discuss • contribs) 16:58, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Content (weighted 20%)
The introduction section is incredibly well-written, summarising many key points in relation to the subject matter. A concerted effort is made to communicate sophisticated ideas in a concise, summative way, before proceeding onto the main sections of discussion. The overall structure that follows is well thought out, and evidences deliberation, delegation and timely organisation. Coverage of many of the salient issues surrounding online identity are included, as well as some quite well-chosen examples and cases.

The actual content itself, in the discursive sections, is a little more patchy than what we expect after that Introduction, with some parts that are more superficial and descriptive, yet others that are clearly very well researched, developed, and thought through. The overall effect of this is fine, because as a whole, there is a clear aesthetic that you are writing a hybrid version of a collaborative essay, and an encyclopaedic entry.

There are some instances of typo errors, and a few formatting decisions that could have been better thought through. In addition, the repetition and ill-organisation in one or two subsections (especially the Tinder and Online Dating Websites section, where there is a lot of description, and not much application of theoretical material from the module – references to journalistic pieces on anonymity for example, where reference to good peer-reviewed sources would have given just as good information with obvious added value and opportunity. Anonymity appears in a couple of sections barely sentenced apart, and yet there doesn’t seem to be much joined-up thinking here, nor applying the concept to the section’s subject matter (Tinder and Online dating). Likewise, discussions of various applications repeat (e.g. Snapchat has a few sections specifically devoted to it. Some interwiki links joining up the various sections would have made more of the platform’s functionality.

The final main section, on AI is particularly interesting – it is fairly well structured, well researched, and draws from a wealth of different kinds of sources and materials – ranging from peer-reviewed sources, through journalism and popular cultural materials, to speculative and science fiction. This helps to close off the chapter in a way that establishes a sense of authority as well as being well-written, and therefore is an interesting read, on its own merits. Again, an interwiki link to join the section on Black Mirror with the previous section on the same topic would have been useful.

Referencing – good formatting, good range of sources and materials.


 * 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


 * Poor. Among other things, poor entries may just offer links without real comment or apparent point. They may offer nothing more than poor-quality synopsis or description of material of dubious relevance. They may have serious clarity problems (including dead links, random graphics) which affect comprehension (or even worse, admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement). They might be off-topic, private trivia, or of unclear relevance. The wiki markup formatting will be of a poor standard.


 * Reading and research:
 * lack evidence of critical engagement with set materials, featuring command of a limited range of relevant materials and analyses
 * little evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material
 * Argument and analysis:
 * poor argument through judgement relating to key issues, concepts or procedures
 * lack of evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position);
 * limited 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 lacking

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