User talk:Downchuck

Hi Downchuck. You left a message for me on my user page indicating you wanted to chat. What can I help you with?
 * Specifically, I'm curious about the possibility of copyright on Griffin's list of Journals. While I've seen all of the movies on the abutting list, I've certainly not witnessed even the existance of all of the Journals. Should I cut it down to Journals widely available (by quality of University library collections), should I trim it only to Journals I can personally review/confirm topicality? Otherwise, any general thoughts about the Social Sciences?
 * Copying the entire list from Griffin seems like it would breach copyright laws, but I'm certainly not an expert. I would suggest following his format but modifying it extensively so no accusation of copyright infringement could be leveled.  There is certainly nothing wrong with creating your own list of journals in Communications, but you may want to see how many you can verify and point the titles to their corresponding web pages.  If they don't have websites, that may be a good way to determine which ones you want to keep: drop the ones that don't have websites.  As for the movies and such, that is clearly drawing very heavily on Griffin's work.  If I were you, I would probably put that list on hold until you can either modify it (by adding or replacing) or replace it entirely.


 * I've extensively modified Griffin's list of movies, adding more R-rated films, and removing all of the films I've not seen. But I understand that I'm walking a fine line. However, as a movie buff, I constantly quote movies to (fail to) explain concepts/thoughts. It typically fails because of the esoteric nature of any given person's catalog of films. But I think it's a wholey appropriate thing to include in a course Appendix. I'll take your advice (and mine) and renovate the Journal listings. I'll also spend more time revising the movie listing, so as to exclude movies listed by Griffin, and reduce his unwilling contribution to something negligible. If that doesn't work, I'll just remove all movies he mentions and restructure the categories. Downchuck 19:56, 12 July 2005 (UTC) I've reconsidered. The media titles should be supported by (an educational) discourse analysis. The list alone is bland and of little value. Downchuck 19:05, 13 July 2005 (UTC) I feel that I've wandered off track. Downchuck 21:16, 16 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Also, User:jxn on Talk:Wikiversity:Social Sciences brings up a point. Most of the theory I focus on is from the Social sciences, but there are large areas of rhetorical criticism that are identified with Humanities.
 * Downchuck 06:22, 11 July 2005 (UTC)


 * This is an interesting issue. Communications is generally included in the Humanities divisions of universities despite the fact that it draws heavily on social scientific theory and is increasingly turning to social scientific methods of research.  I have to admit I am not particularly familiar with Communications (I took one course in my undergraduate training on The Social Construction of Reality - Berger and Luckmann), so my opinion here may be tainted by the current setup of universities.  I would probably suggest keeping it in the Humanities section for now.  Perhaps this will change over time.  But if this division of Wikibooks develops well, I could certainly see the utility in cross-listing it in the social sciences.  I hope this helps.
 * Cross-listing makes some sense. I took some time reviewing various University websites, and Communications placed in the Social sciences on many of them. There are more however, that use the title, Humanities & Social sciences, and others that simply use Liberal Arts. Downchuck 19:56, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The School of Literature and English Studies provides most of the Humanities courses offered within the Communications catalog of my college. This allows the School of Communication a greater focus on social science. There is some overlap that will need to be addressed, eventually. Downchuck 06:57, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

One other thought... If you want someone to go over whatever you develop in terms of theory that is derived from the social sciences, just drop me a line on my talk page and I'll stop by to take a look. Best...


 * Once it's developed, in terms of defensible substance, I certainly will. Many thanks. Downchuck 19:56, 12 July 2005 (UTC)