User talk:Lubo95

Hello this is my user discussion page. I will be using this to register my work on the wikibook project and also to show my academic assignments and also discuss ideas Lubo95 (discuss • contribs) 15:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Yeezus
Yeezus is the 6th solo studio album by Kanye West. this was an album received some of the most mixed reviews ever, as it was a step away from Kanye's prior albums.

This album in particular is inspired by various genres such as Acid house and Punk which Kanye used to create a minimal sound with the thanks of producer Rick Ruben. The album was mostly recorded in Kanye’s own private loft in Paris and he would spend long periods of time in the louvre for inspiration. Kanye’s choice for minimal sound came from his appreciation of minimal design in both furniture and also architecture The album overall had next to none promotion and was not a radio album like Kanye’s others although it did receive some air play but it still lacked the same amount as prior albums. Kanye said however the radio was a place he didn’t want to be any more.

Album Artwork
The artwork for the album also reflected this minimal sound that Kanye wanted.As it was a clear CD case with no artwork the only thing on the Case was red tape covering the opening. Meaning that you would have to rip the tape to get in to the CD. due to these choices it makes it one of the most eye catching albums ever due to the fact it has no indication to what it is.

Track List
Run Time 40:01
 * 1) On Sight
 * 2) Black Skinhead
 * 3) I Am a God
 * 4) New Slaves
 * 5) Hold My Liquor
 * 6) I’M in it
 * 7) Blood on the Leaves
 * 8) Guilt Trip
 * 9) Send it up
 * 10) Bound 2

Personal Thoughts
When the album first released I didn’t have any idea it would become one of my all-time favorites. I never heard the album until I first listened to it on a bootleg vinyl which my friend had. I will never forget the synthesizer on “on sight” the booming siren sound which was generated griped me. I listened to the album in its entirety then and there I was totally captivated by the music. This album was like nothing I had ever heard its ability to seamlessly blend samples into this gritty electric sound was fascinating. It has stuck with me still to this day and I’m am still studying it and always finding something new when I listen, keeping it in my top 5 albums of all-time list.

Marker’s Comment

 * you need to remember to sign your name and date using the four tildes There's some good use of markup here, and you have attempted to engage with some of the issues at hand on the module. It would have been good to explore the module concerns in a little more critical depth. You could have easily thought about tech determinist approaches to music and sharing online, as well as the interaction between notions of online community and subculture. If you are interested in these issues, there is plenty of scholarship on the subject.

RE: Comments on others’ work

 * These are on time (just) - however, they are on the short side and could do with development in terms of content, scope and reference to module themes. Remember that your comments on other people's work is weighted as heavily as your own post when it comes to grades. In this case, your mark for the exercise cam down because of the one-liner nature of your comments on other work. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 17:05, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Kanye's connection with fans
Yeezus did have mixed reviews from fans. this was partly due to the change in sonics and also the stylistic and lyrical approach from Kanye. due to this we seen the final disconnection of fans(the ones who enjoyed kanye's early work). this also lead to nemours online debates with fans prodmently people adoring the album old and new fans, and also those who despised the album due to the drastic change.

fandom and kanye west are very interesting. this is due to the fact that kanye is somewhat of a obnuacions character he is able to say things ie "I am a God" and people will believe that to an extent. due to people idolising and seeing kanye as a god like figure who can never be wrong, and because of this it could be deemed as dangerous due to the fact no one will view both sides of arguments.

Lubo95 (discuss • contribs) 11:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments
Some very interesting points, how do you think Kanye will fair in the next US election campaign if her runs (as he claims he will ) ? JamesHerdTHE3rd1845 (discuss • contribs) 01:37, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise number Two Educational Assignment
With always online aspect to today's culture it is clear that information about myself and everyone else is out there.

I currently use Facebook,Instagram and twitter. although most of these profiles are not in use the information is still there to see and if you do a search you can find out where I am from and my age. something which in the past would have even been a difficult task to find out.

it seems that now more than ever people are less reluctant to defend there information and are willing to post almost a bio of themselves for people to see which can be quite an issue when it comes to information being found out easily. another instance of this could be the iPhone's ability to accept payment through the finger print it is something which I have found quite interesting as your phone can now store one of the most key elements of information of yourself and people seem to think that this is safe.

Lubo95 (discuss • contribs) 10:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise number Three Educational Assignment
Information overload is something I have a great issue with. it can be hard sometimes to decipher crucial points when you think everything is crucial information so how do we determine legit information over something which is not.

firstly I personally am a professional procrastinator, and because of this I am distracted all the time by information online. this can be a nightmare when it comes to finding the right information for example when looking for journals or information for essays how does one simply find out what is what when there is so much information to look through. due to this I have come to disregard a lot of information instantly when it come to certain aspects of finding information. I tend to trust online versions of traditional media than a blog or facebook even if the information is true. The reason i think this, is due to the fact the information is from my peers and in a society now where the acceptable answer for anything is just google it. i tend to find i trust online more and more than what is being said however every piece of information online i tend to take with a grain of salt.

overall i think nowadays informations abundance makes it hard to see what the truth is and turning to old media seemed to be a more sure way to ensure the data is correct to an extent.

Lubo95 (discuss • contribs) 10:26, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments
I agree with the idea that it can be very confusing to find out which information is the right one. Especially looking on the right source for essay-information. It is sometimes just not possible to prove if somebody writes the truth. I also liked the idea to prefer traditional media instead of Facebook and blogs because nobody can really control what is happening there. What I think i a big threat is that there are so many links that we only see the ones that were most clicked and not the ones which were best. Good post about an interesting topic! SimonBrinkmann (discuss • contribs) 19:00, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Decent article. I understand not taking everything found on the internet seriously. That is one of the ways we process and filter out information. At the same time, it seems that mainly we also can not be bothered to literally go look up things in books. We all dread it when an assignment requires we find offline sources. When it comes to procrastinating I too have difficulty with that, often believing I have more time than I really do. Part of this is a combination of information and sensory overload. There is so much to read and do and look at. Alongside that, I try "multi-tasking" by listening to a podcast while I try reading an article and writing a response. All these inputs slow down output for sure. What are other things that you do to try to curb your procrastination? On another note, I would suggest going through this again as I saw many grammatical and spelling errors. Stafoya (discuss • contribs) 11:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 4
The wiki book project was something to me which truly highlighted how using tools online can be a place where things can be done no matter the differences of culture and language. This is partly due to the collaborative nature of the work. When it came to meeting with the group I found it much more better to talk in person as we managed to set out clear plans on what we wished to focus on and it seemed that everything was well until we got on to the page, as we realised that we also had to coordinate with multiple groups. This lead too many confusion trying to pick our topics with others due to the amount of information it was something which was hard to narrow down because everything felt that it was of some importance. Now when it came to the collaborative efforts I began to see the link between this and the civic web. For example this highlighted conative surplus, as we all collaborated to craft a wiki with information which we done by using accessible tools to gain information and also make this information available to those online who wish to use it in turn doing something technically positive. I also seen participatory democracy and culture in place although there were some hierarchical structures in areas I could personally see that the process of choosing our topics and finding things to do was democratic, as everyone was able to discuss and make decisions online through wiki which would best suited the group. I did also see that the way discussions where conveyed showed the groups had felt each contribution mattered, as highlighted in the overall number of contributions which allowed expression, engagement and creation which lead to the overall finished project. I did however feel a social connection as every contributor double checked with one another if it was okay to add to a section to help bring the wiki to a more well-rounded and complete piece of collaborative work. Overall my own personal experience with the wiki was somewhat of negative although I could see various theory in place, the always online nature of the task put me under a lot of pressure to ensure I was always involved, I also didn’t feel that there was a democracy it felt that in the group there where definite hierarchies which inevitably made all the decisions and it felt like you were stepping on toes if you wanted to help within the project with the same sector as someone else. Due to these factors it made it hard for me personally to keep up with the amount of information and make sense of it. I did see that when people come together online and work, a fuller more developed project can be completed due to various different people from all areas of skill and life doing collaboration making it better than someone doing it alone. Lubo95 (discuss • contribs) 10:22, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Lewis, I agree with the idea that due to the nature of the group, it was easier for different cultures to come together. Also, the point you raised about the confusion that was caused when trying to pick our topic on the page is arguably correct. I particularly agree with your point about Participatory Democracy. The way in which we chose our topics was quite democratic.

Although I see where you are cing from about the hierarchy within the group and feeling as if you were stepping on toes; I would argue that the project, overall, has been a positive experience. The nature of the tasks set were difficult, but I think that was good to challenge us and to pet us see the theories that we have studied in practice - in the real world - all-be-it digitally. Jackgpounder (discuss • contribs) 08:36, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
You appear to be the main contributor to the section on Brian Loader in the chapter page. This is a significant contribution to the chapter page, is well written and includes lots of enriched content (interwiki and external links, formatting etc.). Your work is also well researched, and includes citations although it is somewhat geared towards factual, biographical info rather than critical engagement with ideas. If you had made more of the full project period, the quantity of work would have been significantly more than in evidence here – you do not therefore quite reach your potential.

Wiki Exercises


 * 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.

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) 14:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)