User talk:Juliabutgiulia

This is my wikibook discussion page. I will be exploring wikibook and updating this page, as part of an academic project. Please, feel free to comment on this page.

Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 14:16, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 1 - educational assignment
Nowadays we are so deeply affected by technology we own that most of our lives are planned through a screen. Even something as traditional and deep-routed in history like celebrations have had to adapt. For example, the Carnival of Venice is an annual festival celebrating Carnevale that now fills the media between January and February (dates vary), ending forty days before Easter with [|Lent]. It is said to have started unofficially in 1162 in honour of a victory of the “Serenissima Repubblica” (Republic of Venice) against the Patriarch of Aquileia.

During this time of the year, Venice fills with an atmosphere of mystery and magic, combining the ancient and the new throughout the days and nights of celebrations, ranging from themed private parties to public shows in the canals, the narrow paths, the squares and the historical buildings. Masks and costumes are the main attraction of Carnevale, handcrafted or homemade unique pieces, symbol of elegance and beauty throughout the world, although there is much more to the event. Locals and tourists can enjoy traditional treats (such as Frittelle and Galani) for example and in general the environment is palpably vibrant, bursting with festive colours, odours and sounds, worth experiencing at least once in a lifetime. Photographs and/or videos of both Venice and Carnival have been a must for years, with the breathtaking sceneries of an ancient city becoming the frame of the festival.

Even though both city and event are well known, advertising has moved to a broader audience, where the old word of mouth has been replaced by a more solid structure on the web through event pages, social media and parallel events. Updates, line-up of events, photographs and news star in official and unofficial accounts on socials like twitter and Instagram for example, not to mention the facebook profiles and the blogs of locals and tourists. Through this, the media brings the Carnival of Venice around the world, making it accessible, although partially, to many more people than the ones who can actually participate.

Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 19:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 1: Formative Feedback
Your user talk page has a good structure which demonstrates some fluency in wiki markup, which is confirmed through your use of links (although your reference to the Wikipedia article on 'Lent' has been swallowed by the number). Your first exercise response is well written and informative. Your responses to classmates demonstrate an engagement with their reflections and extends their thinking

A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade 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. Sprowberry (discuss • contribs) 10:06, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 2: Visibility and Online Footprint (educational assignment)
Just like with advertisement, if society feeds on the media, it is also true that the media relies on society. A few years ago I personally owned a small phone (very late in comparison to my classmates) that had no internet access and I could happily forget about it for days – often being told off for not replying to text messages or phone calls. Nowadays though, thanks to a push from society, from my sphere of friends to the promoted false needs of the market, my footprint in the media has increased significantly and scaringly. What has happened to the fear I once had of protecting my identity and privacy from the online world? The media has essentially become a living part of us, a phone an extension of our body, and personal information a public domain. A government or an individual can easily control elements from their online footprint. Chunks of our lives are available to the public through photos, log in requirements, posts and creations through a net of applications we use on a daily basis, from the email to facebook. Even leaving one little bit of information in each used social results in a great data bank overall as pieces of puzzle being joined together. Not to mention that now even applications are connected to each other and share information (for example through Google you can access an email account but also a youtube profile eccetera, from the work to the leisure related). Personally, although I have developed as an online person, I do not own many public profiles using mainly Facebook, although with a selected number of contact I am reachable on Snapchat and Whatsapp, and do not share great amounts of personal information. Is it possible for us anymore to detach from this “culture”, from the dependency of the digital? Sadly, probably not, as we are connected to the world 24/7, relying on this easily accessible network, often unaware of how vulnerable we are making our private identity to obtain visibility.

Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 20:56, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments
I find this very interesting and I agree with your conclusions that it is so difficult nowadays to detach from the 'always on' culture, as it is so generally expected that we be contactable 24/7, and put a certain amount of ourselves online for others to see, even if it is just our friends or family. This inter-related reliance of the media and society is what is responsible for ever-growing and expanding social media, the arrival of new platforms, all trying to fulfil a need they tell us we have, and we buy into it, and so it goes on. No matter how small your presence online, on social media and so on, as you say, there are puzzle pieces of information on you out there, and it's hard not to question the safety of this were it all to be in the hands of one person- innocuous log-in information even can reveal personal details that may lead to more and quickly amass a wealth of information that you never intended to be shared. And yet we still do it in the name of 'keeping up', as you say from the pressure of society through those around us. Lilygeorgia96 (discuss • contribs) 18:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

It quite interesting what you said, I agree with you, society is pushing you to use any form of social network; and even if you don't have any intention to use, share or comment anything on the web, but the society and the culture that you are living force you in same ways to be part of this activity, and to be connected and linked to the internet 24/7, take this assignment for example I didn't have any form of interest on Wikibooks, I have never thought about writing and commenting anything on this platform or any other platform because I find comments and other form of sharing quite useless, but in the last weeks I spent so many hours on this site trying to understand how it works, just because the society, in this case through the University, wanted me to be part of this website to understand better part of the digital media culture. As you said “society feeds on the media, and media relies on society” in my opinion, even if it sound quite obvious, we should not separate the two things, the society and the social media are the same artefact divided by the medium that they use, anything that we find and leave on the web is the same sign/mark and footprint that we leave on real world, the only difference is the material that we are leaving behind; in one case is something made of flesh and blood and the other is just a series of 0 and 1.Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 04:07, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 3: Information Overload!
In the digital era, the average user of any device, from the web search to the social platform communication, is bombarded by research-related advertisement and appealing links (usually catchy story headings or photographs), daily source of distraction. The Web becomes therefore a World Wide cobweb, a trap of interconnecting layers linking to each other, carefully sewn around the user by a virtual spider.

From South Park's satirical approach to a more academic reading, the phenomenon of information overload is a well recognized and to some extent worrying one. The user is aware, at least to some extent, that there is an overload but at the same time the dispersion is so addictive there is no "interest" in stopping it. Every page becomes appealing, interesting, relevant; curiosity is tickled and the reader feels the urge to know, to see, to have. Link after link a need is created although based on the wrong principles and detached from the original search/intention that brought the person to the screen.

We, should probably enforce a degree of surveillance on ourselves and our use of the internet and I myself am aware that, although I try to focus on the work minimizing the number of branching out distractions, often end up with more tabs open that would really be necessary. I am still able to cut off the majority of distractions if I need to concentrate, especially closing down all forms of social media, but at the same time I am aware of how much time is wasted in front of the screen. This realization usually occurs after having been online, to my disappointment, although in several occasions I have found it difficult to go to sleep as there was so much to do on the other side of the screen. I somehow feel that except in cases where it is of 'vital' importance to concentrate, we are too used to having everything at hand's reach 24/7 and being in constant contact with the world, to effectively reduce the information we process and distinguish between the important and the distracting. Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 19:44, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments
Hey @Juliabutgiulia, I like your point of view. When you talk about the information overload, do you only have in mind the overload only created by Internet or you look on the things like a mixture between personality, character of the person, his interaction with different environment in life? Honestly, how many unused tabs do you have being opened in your browser? What is your opinion about applications like AdBlocker that filter the popping up windows? I really don't want to imagine using the WWW without at least 2 operating apps of that kind. Cheers! Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 23:40, 1 March 2016 (UTC) It think that your argument about “we are too used to having everything at hand's reach 24/7 and being in constant contact with the world, to effectively reduce the information we process and distinguish between the important and the distracting.” Raise a good question to the topic; now days we are so used to internet and the overload of information on it that we are not able to discern what is “good” for us and what make us distracted; and I think that is one of the biggest problem, we don't pay attention of why we are using internet and what is a good information; we go on the web being off, without paying attention, with any kind of care; this kind of passive attitude make the biggest different between the understating of what we can consider a useful and essential information and something that goes under the category of distracting, overload and useless thing that might create a problem for our concentration. Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 02:27, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * @Gvg00001 initially I must admit I didn't understand what you were asking, as the post was about digital overload. But I guess that from the digital the focus can be moved to a broader environment, therefore taking into account the information that comes from other people too (and not just digital medias like ads, computers, tvs), as second hand, processed data. You also raise an interesting concept, taking into account the predisposition of a person to the information overload (capacity or incapacity of filtering information, focusing on the important things eccetera. I have personally never used adblocker and don't usually find myself in situations where I would desperately need it. I don't know or have an exact number, but as with the majority of people I have more than one tab open almost every time I am using the web, and for example when at home I prefer to work with two screens to my laptop instead than one.

Nice post! You've made the point that being distracted online by 'useless' information is a bad thing, personally I disagree. Yes, when we have a 3000 word lab report due tomorrow we probably shouldn't be looking up 25 Deadpool Moments That Prove He's The Greatest, but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy looking up seemingly pointless information on the web any other time. Most people (not all) have the common sense to take what they read online with a pinch of salt, but let's be honest, if you're reading through something like How to Make Perfectly Circular Pancakes Every Time it's not really necessary for you to extensively fact-check the article for two main reasons: you're probably never going to use this information in a practical way, and secondly, if you did, the worst outcome would be that your pancakes weren't perfectly round (I should have used a less traumatising example). My point is, when you're doing actual research, or writing a paper, of course you have to be aware of the quality of the information that you're working with, but in day to day internet browsing I think there are much worse things you could be doing online than looking up some pointless, clickbait information. KerryFromThePub (discuss • contribs) 10:26, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia I'm sorry this is late I mis-understood part of the brief. You make some excellent points which really hit home. Sometimes I wake up and spend an hour scrolling through my phone opening random Buzzfeed links or those ones which are like 20 celebrities you didn't know were gay. I open them up and the majority I already know are openly gay and I feel like I'll never get those two minutes back. Links are such an addiction aren't they? Having so much technology is like being a kid wanting sweets and then when you have them being bored and wanting the next thing. It's frustrting because I always forget the links about five minutes after I've read them yet those couple of seconds of ooohh seem to last a life time. Glad I'm not the only one. HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 20:00, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * @HayleyJo87 true, links can be very appealing and to an extent addictive... probably because they are always within easy reach of the user, the usually have some (even if ever so remote) connection to a previous search and well, they advertise themselves. What I mean here is that they usually have very catchy headings that make you want to open them and read more.

Wiki Exercise 4 - Wikibook Project Reflective Account
The Wikibooks project we students (second year Film&Media) had to work on proved to be a challenge but also an interesting experience, as teamwork was required to tackle topics I had never even heard of before this module. To some extent each person worked in a context of collaboration through superposition like many open source projects, where subtopics were created and developed individually. At the same time though the project is a form of collective intelligence, where Wikipedia itself is an example of this, as each little section contributes to the creation of a far greater information bank.

An active use of Wikipedia was required and being the first time for me, as I imagine was for many other students involved in the project, it was difficult to get the section up and running smoothly. The discussion page was at times confusing and it was important to check in with the group every now and then for support and future steps, but there was a lot of waiting between an entry and a reply as in life we all have different schedules and had to combine other activities with the Wikibook’s evolution. Sometimes it felt like the expectations put forward for this task by the module requirement were higher than the resources we were given, as with few directions and little preparation, we had to create the book, in collaboration with people we didn’t know. Without doubt this activity though has given me new skills, forcing me to engage in a group activity. Through this project I was able to interact with my classmates, something that I must admit I would have otherwise not done unless explicitly requested by seminar tasks, and made a new friend with whom I have engaged in interesting conversations outside the Wikibooks discussion page branching from our opinions, point of view and suggestions regarding the project.

We were forced into this project, but perhaps it is not of immediate realization how this was a little glance into a world out there, as there are people who spontaneously get involved in projects of collaboration with strangers from different countries. Even though there has been skepticism and criticism, we were able to create something as a group, pages of information, following David Gauntlett’s words as he states that a powerful resource or service can be the resulting outcome of using the collective abilities of a group of people of an online network. It was in a nutshell, the simplified version of what happens with things like gamification (where there is a ranking and build up of data, with users trying to reach higher scores and objectives) and open source systems (softwares like Linux where the source code can be modified and improved by anyone). We entered a situation that Clay Shirky depicts with cognitive surplus (also a book), where students -although initially forced to engage with the activity- contributed to the creation of the booklet through a relatively simple tool to use as is Wikipedia, helping each other out and developing the task relatively creatively and freely. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 16:43, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments
It is quite interesting how we almost felt the same way during this project, and we agree on what was difficult and easy during this task; I think really important what you say in the end about the “cognitive surplus” and about the fact that together we contributed to the creation of the booklet through a relatively simple tool to use as is Wikipedia, helping each other out and developing the task relatively creatively and freely; I think that was the main goal and task of this project and the most important thing that we had to learn working on these Wikibooks, beside all the data and information that we gained working on this project what really made important this work was the fact of the massive collaboration between the individual and group and how so many people with different background and culture can work together improving each other to achieve what is needed for the community or in this case for a big group of students. Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 08:47, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Group project
Hi Juliabutgiulia, It seems that you, couple more people and I are assigned to do the group project together. Any idea how to organize the things? The other users are NoRagrets9 and Kellysun960601, but I couldn't figure out the name of the last guy who is not in the usernames list.

Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 14:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I apologize being able to read and reply only this evening. Yes, surveillance and sousveillance topic. The other team member is CITOYEN__LUC. First things first probably ideal to get in touch with everyone. Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 21:08, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I was waiting to receive an email informing for your response there, but just now decided to check your page here. Did you manage to get in touch with everyone? Time is running out and still I have no idea about how to organize the work and how to manage to communicate with everyone together. Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 14:15, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Are you attending the lab today 11-12:30? Come to meet. :) Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 11:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

This week I am, out of chance, attending said lab Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 11:38, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Juliabutgiulia, I was considering is there any chance to arrange a meeting and discuss the topic with everyone? I still have no idea about how to do this work and what am supposed to do with this topic. :( --Kellysun960601 (discuss • contribs) 16:09, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

That is a possibility, yes, I would be up for a meeting, unfortunately I wouldn't be able to do it before Friday. Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 19:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

I suggest it is quicker and more efficient if we set up a facebook group chat, give each other tasks about the topic and then add content independently. I welcome everyone to add me on facebook - http://www.facebook.com/gvgoranov Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 23:32, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

@Gvg00001 @Kellysun960601 @NoRagrets9 @CITOYEN__LUC (I hope I didn't miss anyone out) Hey guys, hope all is well. I have just added another subtopic to the book - "sousveillance and art?" is the title - ...just thought it would be good to post this info here too just to make you more directly aware. As I said on the discussion page, feel free to add comments, post suggestions and perhaps contribute with case studies and situations if you come across them during research of your own. And remember, we can do this! :) --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 14:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia, thanks for your supportive comment on the book discussion page! Like I said, I didn't mean to take anyone's piece of work, but after I saw that no content was added during the break and in the week after, I just took some actions. Your subtopic sounds like a good idea. Do you have any particular example or case? Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs)

Hey @Gvg00001 @Kellysun960601 @Juliabutgiulia  I just added our group name to the list of groups just in case we decide to write anything as a group so we can discuss it on the page. If there is a topic anyone wants to do that needs a few people then maybe we can do it together. I'm just not 100% on why we were put in groups in the first place, so better safe than sorry. Thanks NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 19:33, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Gvg00001 no need to thank me, we should support each other and work cooperatively afterall as this is a group project! :) think that considering how it is easier to work on and develop things that others have already started it was a good move on your side to initiate that. My subtopic...I am still doing research but it's shaping up in my mind so I'm quite confident. I think I am going to use to artists as example/case, yes, was reading some interesting things about their work earlier. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 21:50, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@NoRagrets9 thank you for that, might be useful! To be honest as of now though I'm not completely sure what we could add in there but as you said, better safe than sorry. I am not even sure if we are supposed to copy and paste part of this conversation there and expand it in said context or we can just leave things as they are.. it's a bit confusing. I guess just if you need any help with your section or would like comments/support/further research then give me/us a shout there? --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 21:50, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiulia Hey no problem! I'm okay with my stuff just now, just finished a small section about data mining. I will probably have a go at another section tomorrow. I'll put it on our wee group bit so everyone knows what I'm doing. As long as we are contributing and have discussed it together we should be fine. Thanks! NoRagrets9 (discuss • contribs) 22:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiolia @Kellysun960601 @NoRagrets9 @CITOYEN__LUC, we could make a new section on the discussion page of the book, where we could say we were commenting so far. Do you like the idea? Just a new section below the current comments, with our group name on it. Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs)

sorry, Gvg00001 I don't understand...we already have a group section thanks to NoRagrets9. Do you mind explaining what you mean though? --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 21:02, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

@Juliabutgiolia, I was thinking about the creation of a similar group. The thing is I first wrote here and after that I saw it was created. Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs)

Similar content
Hi I posted something on the boards last night but it was quite late so I don't think I formatted it properly. We've both come up with something similar to Screenshot sousveillance but while some of our content is similar I'm coming at it from an infidelity angle and the release of a Tinder share button which they argue people can take screenshots already. I'm a bit behind because I had an extension for English and haven't been able to keep up with the boards. Have a read, let me know what you think and I can ask Greg. I can see you've spent a lot of time on the wiki books project and I totally admire that,I wish I had more time to be more engaged but i've had English to contend with. Anyway this was my first post so I hope we can cooperate and come to an arrangement.

HayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 09:32, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

HelloHayleyJo87, apologies for my late reply but I'm caught in other work too... I just read your message on the discussion page and am going to reply there if that is ok with you, instead of here. --Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 18:17, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Yeah that's fine. I'll wait for it. I just messaged you here because I worried the message might have got lost in translationHayleyJo87 (discuss • contribs) 18:24, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

It was good that you texted even here... only thing is that I did not see it till now so sorry. Have replied by the way. I might be on the wrong track but at first glance I understood it like that, correct me if I'm wrong.--Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 18:33, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
You show a good level of engagement with peers - although primarily near the end of the project. This included taking the important role in ensuring continuity between sections and proofreading. Your final post showed greater integration and understanding of module themes in comparison to some of the older ones. There's some evidence of using secondary sources, although your submission would benefit from further integration of reading.

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives a good brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a good range of concepts associated with your subject, and the effort to deliver critical definitions, drawing from relevant literature and scholarship, and your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is very much in evidence. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a good range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of critical engagement with set materials, although some ideas and procedures more securely grasped than others
 * evidence of independent reading of somewhat circumscribed range of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material
 * Argument and analysis:
 * well-articulated and well-supported argument featuring variable depth of understanding
 * satisfactory level of evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position in discussion);
 * satisfactory level of evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections in discussion);
 * evidence of variable independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content to a variable standard (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * Satisfactory engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Reflexive, creative and fairly well-managed use of discussion pages using deployment of somewhat limited judgement relating to key issues, concepts or procedures

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 3 May 2016 (UTC)