User talk:MoreThanMax

This is my WikiBooks user discussion page. I will be exploring WikiBooks and registering my experiences on this page. Please feel free to discuss any ideas you have with me and help explore the WikiBooks project. MoreThanMax (discuss • contribs) 14:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 1: Educational Assignment
'I went to a fight the other night, and a hockey game broke out.' This has become one of the best known jokes about the sport of ice hockey, particularly the kind played in America and Canada by the teams of the National Hockey League (NHL). For those who don't watch the sport it is best known for its huge body check hits, and sometimes violent altercations between players on the ice. However for the people who love to watch the sport there are also displays of insane skill from some of the best athletes int he world, who are also brilliant characters. While at first hockey can look like 10 guys and 2 goalies just beating the hell out of each other on ice skates there's a lot more to the game, fights and all, than meets the eye. Each game starts with 5 players and 1 goalie from each team on the ice and they swap out in a system of rolling subs of 3 offensive players and 2 defensive, while goalies play full games unless they get pulled for injury or bad performance. Penalties are given on a personal basis, with the normal being 2 minutes off the ice, which leads to a 5v4 power play (although this can also go to 5v3, 4v4, 4v3 or 3v3 depending on what happens). As in any scenario where a number of people are skating about on ice and smashing each other with blades on their feet some pretty nasty injuries can occur (seriously this link is the worst case scenario so viewer discretion is advised) but there's many examples of players being some of the toughest people on the planet, like the Bruins' Greg Campbell staying on with a broken leg. All of this combined with the insanely fast paced nature of the game come together to make it the best sport to watch, hands down and it is only getting bigger in the UK with the EIHL attendance growing year on year. The intensity and dedication of the players is unmatched, the level of physicality of the game is second to none and it is entertaining as hell to go to games and watch them online. I'd watch hockey every day if I could. 

MoreThanMax (discuss • contribs) 15:06, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 1: Formative Feedback
You've demonstrated a competency with wiki markup through your use of links throughout the exercise, although you might wish to add a description of what each link leads to. This is generally well written (don't forget to check for typos!) and engaging although it would benefit from a greater level of critical engagement to push your mark towards the higher grade boundaries. This can be done through linking your discussion to the module themes. Perhaps in this case you could have talked about how it's possible for fans to follow the sport through YouTube highlights and social media. For this exercise, you have not commented on colleagues' posts: this is an important part of your final grade so please make sure to do this for the other exercises.

A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor: 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. Sprowberry (discuss • contribs) 10:37, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 2: Online Visibility
My online visibility is probably a lot greater than I realise or I would like it to be. Between Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, PSPlus and Steam (as well as another account or two I probably made when I was younger and have since forgotten about), there is likely an uncomfortable amount of information about me kicking about the internet. PSPlus and Steam are unlikely to tell you a huge amount me as a person, beyond the fact I have spent way too much time playing NHL 16 and Left 4 Dead, but the others, particularly Facebook and Snapchat, could give a pretty intense inside view of my life. From my Facebook alone you can see my last 4 years if work history (plus my early career as a Pokemon Master from the age of 3 to 17), where I'm from, where I live now, where I go to university, my girlfriend's name and Facebook profile and the fact that I really enjoy taking a lot of photos. As far as Facebook goes everything that is on there is there of my own volition, no one forced me to get an account or upload countless photos of some of my dearest friends looking like idiots, and of that content almost all of it is entirely public. It consists of information that I am comfortable having in the public sphere and because of that it is somewhat edited. If I go out for a day and do something really cool I will post about it on Facebook, but if I spend the day on my ass playing video games and ordering take-away pizza I won't post about it. This leads to it being something of an idealised view of my day to day life. Even the way I post photos and videos goes along with this, if I shoot 500 in a day (which I have too many times) only the 10 best will get posted because those are the ones that I want people to see. Twitter I barely use and Instagram I use more for the intake of content than any real output. Arguably the realest view of my life is also the one that the fewest people have access to and that is through Snapchat. Snapchat isn't taken as seriously, isn't permanent and is seen by the fewest people so because of this it is where the dumbest stuff that I want to share goes. If I want to share something that I am doing as it happens I use Snapchat, if I want to show that I am in the process of doing something incredibly stupid that could lead to injury I use Snapchat and if I want to take the piss out of my friends by sharing photos of them making really stupid faces that they didn't think anyone would see I use Snapchat. Due to all this it really is the most honest insight into my day to day life. MoreThanMax (discuss • contribs) 20:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

You mentioning forgotten accounts you created when you were younger made me realise that there's probably a lot more information online about me than I thought at first too, and the same is probably true for other kids of our generation as well. I relate to you in the sense that I mostly use Instagram for content intake as opposed to output (and the same for Facebook in my case), and that the few photos and content I do post to such platforms is of my own volition and I therefor feel fairly in control of what information is available about me - other than those aforementioned forgotten accounts of course! CalSmith96 (discuss • contribs) 22:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I found it interesting that you said Snapchat is not taken seriously because it's not permanent therefore you post there more freely, but obviously all your pictures you put in Snapchat are saved somewhere. Do you think there's a possibility that one day you'll see your pictures somewhere, at a random place on the Internet? --Evp09 (discuss • contribs) 10:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I would totally agree with you about the idea of creating an idealised version of my life over social media. I see a lot of people on my newsfeed that use their profiles as a sort of diary, and share far too much personal information and problems for the public to see. However, I only really use facebook as my virtual photo album, and generally only use it to share cool experiences like yourself. This probably makes my life look way more interesting than it actually is! Justalex 28 (discuss • contribs) 10:39, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
There's evidence that you found it difficult to find a niche in an already busy group, but an important part of the assignment was to overcome this through engagement with colleagues. Instead, the only contribution you have made to the chapter is to correct a typographic error. This is coupled with a lack of engagement with the wiki exercises. This means there is very little to assess your understanding on, and the single available exercise is very descriptive and does not engage with relevant secondary sources.

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page fails to give an overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is little familiarity in evidence with concepts associated with your subject, and the grasp of conceptual, factual and analytical issues is tenuous and limited at best. You did not find any appreciable primary and secondary sources about the chapter’s themes.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * no evidence of critical engagement with set materials;
 * no evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material
 * Argument and analysis:
 * no evidence of argument;
 * no evidence of critical thinking or discussion
 * no evidence of relational thinking or discussion
 * no evidence of independent critical ability

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

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 14:52, 3 May 2016 (UTC)