User talk:Georgiaml97

Wiki Exercise #1: What Makes a Good Wiki?
The way in which people engage with social media (such as Tumblr and WordPress) differs to the way in which people engage with Wikipedia and Wikibooks. Although social media, particularly sites like WordPress can be (and are) used to share information the engagement still differs to the sharing of information on Wikipedia and such sites. WordPress is used as a platform for blogging, and generally involves the sharing of anecdotal information, mainly based on personal, subjective experiences. Whereas information shared on Wikipedia is generally more factual, which is therefore more objective information. This engagement reflects the different purposes of the websites, as WordPress is designed to be a blogging platform, which generally consists of personal posts; whereas Wikipedia is designed to give factual information.

The way in which people engage with profiles on these varying platforms also differs. Profiles on social media are adapted depending on the target audience, which influence what information is included. This is because profiles are used as a representation of the individual and can influence impressions, therefore individuals are generally weary about how much information they reveal on their profiles. Whereas on Wikipedia, there is significantly less personal information on users, as the website is more for gaining information than connecting with individuals. On websites, such as Tumblr and WordPress the aesthetic of the profile is very important, as users can customise themes, which represents themselves and their personality. On the other hand, Wikipedia and Wikibooks do not have this level of customisation, as it is less about the individual and more about the information they share.

A major difference in engagement is the level of collaboration between individuals. WordPress can be used to create a blog that is ran by several individuals who all post on the same blog, but is generally used for individual use. Tumblr is also generally used individually, but allows users to share posts from others by ‘reblogging’ and add their own comments. Therefore, social media is generally expected to be, and used, individually. Whereas, Wikipedia and Wikibooks it is expected to be contributed to by more than one individual. It could be argued that because Wikipedia is using more objective knowledge then it is easier for many individuals to contribute, whereas, social media is more subjective and is therefore less of a ‘one-size-fits-all’ setup.

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.

always sign your edits on discussion pages - I have difficulty in tracking any of your work otherwise! It appears that you've not posted anything else anywhere.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – none undertaken. This would effectively halve your mark.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 11:02, 14 February 2017 (UTC)