User talk:Natashakirmse

Hey, I'm Natashakirmse. Welcome to my discussion page. I'm on Wikibooks to explore the potential of the website for a Digital Media and Culture class I'm currently enrolled in. Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 18:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #1 - What Makes a Good Wiki?
My previous experiences of online collaboration have been mainly limited to Facebook groups or shared Google docs pages. In both instances the conversation was shared between select members in a group that gave us a private connection, allowing us to discuss our project and ideas about the topic among one another without interference. Facebook is useful in communication with group members as it allows conversation to flow and people to comment and build upon each other's ideas. Google docs is similar in its ability to easily present an idea to the group, however the ability to make changes to the document of the project is easier through its shared capacity. That said, it's also harder to make comments about why you'd like to change something and it takes a bit more organization for ideas. I've found in the past that Facebook is best for project planning and idea sharing while Google docs tended to be better for projects in which everyone had an individual aspect they had to write up and submit.

This is interesting. I haven't ever used Google Docs in this way; I have only ever accessed something that someone else has created and shared and I hadn't realised that Google Docs worked in that way. It is similar to the way in which Glow Docs work, but that is a contained schools-only system and so not widely accessible. Vickthestick (discuss • contribs) 11:58, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Google docs was a commonly used platform for school projects during my teen years. I've never heard of Glow Docs before, though it could likely be due to my education being in Canada rather than the UK. We were often encouraged by our teachers to open shared Google docs so all members of the group could access, share, and work collectively on the project at any given time. It works well as the only people who are able to add and edit the page have to be invited via email by the member who created the page, making it fairly secure. Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 16:00, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

My limited experience on Wiki has given me the sense that collaboration here takes a different, more academic form. The medium is more formal than conversations on social media platforms and the feedback is not as instantaneous. Wiki discussions are also available to the public and make the writer more conscious of what they are saying and putting out as their opinions. While Wiki entries are able to be edited and altered by the author or others, the concept of publishing an entry to the public for feedback is more threatening than joking around with friends about whose idea will work better. In regards to idea sharing and collaboration with ideas, Wiki feels like a less secure way to construct a project. Although people can freely make edits to the page there is less room for free, private discussions about the change. Every comment and argument is posted openly leaving little room for mind mapping and tossing out ideas. It does however present a solid platform for one to engage with the information posted and add their own comments and facts to the work, making the information more in-depth.

Facebook and Google docs tend to be used more commonly for collaborative assignments, and the ease of use likely lends to that. Social media platforms are known by many today, making them more comfortable to use for further contact and engagement about ideas and projects. That said, as stated before my experience with Wiki is limited and it's very possible that once I adapt I'll find myself more open about using Wiki to post opinions and ideas as well as edit the work of others if I see an error. However for the time being, I prefer to stick to media such as Facebook for my communication and collaboration methods.

Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 21:43, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree, Google docs is a great way to ease a group project also I have been using it to plan out group trips and make itineraries this way people can present to everyone where/when we leave/stay and/or how much someone owns another for the Airbnb. With Facebook group chats they are so easy to use and make it more personal compared to Wiki, which so far seems very formal and the layout is much harder to read, in my opinion. Madisonhen (discuss • contribs) 21:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I also think that Google docs is such an easy and efficient way to collaborate online. I have always used Google docs and presentations when working in group projects. As I start to comment on posts on our Wikibooks, I can see how this can also be useful and in a way similar to Google docs in the sense that anyone can write and edit on one particular post. Although there are some similarities, I do not think that the conversations are as quick as they would be on Facebook or Google. Sam ediko (discuss • contribs) 21:50, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

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.


 * It is quite difficult to differentiate your contribs from those of others (this goes for your own post as well as the comments you make on other people's discussion pages. You need to work on formatting using a template that helps to differentiate your work from that of others. A bit like I'm doing here, where I've added a new section and outlining my points one at a time. Making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would go a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, as you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this will make a considerable difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are fairly good, if a little brief. Remember that the comments are "worth" as much as posts themselves. The reason for this is not only to help encourage discussion (a key element of wiki collaboration!) but also to get you to reflect upon your own work. This can all, of course be used to fuel ideas that might form part of your project work. I like that you are contributing meaningfully to discussion - arguably the civic element of wiki that you ought to be thinking about, which you clearly are).

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 18:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Online Visibility
Online visibility is a concept I've been terrified of for most of my life. It may have been due to watching too many crime shows as a child and adolescent (also known as the CSI Effect) or my older brother feeding every paranoia just for fun, but I've always been concerned with how much of my identity is on display for others. I tend to take precaution when it comes to social media accounts and online visibility not only due to my concern for privacy, but a concern for professional appearance for future employers as well. That said, I still have several social media accounts through platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, Youtube, and Snapchat that I use with friends and family members. I also have multiple email addresses through various companies that are used for school, work, or friends and family. My use of social media is very limited and often with those I trust implicitly. I do my best to avoid posting personal information and continually use the highest privacy settings available to me.

Facebook
Facebook is a social networking site that connects people from accross the world, making them "friends" of an individual. Though the name implies a relationship prior to the connection online, anyone is able to become "friends" and depending on the setting of a profile, anyone is able to access the photographs and posts made. Despite Facebook being a place for friends and family to share information about their daily lives, I've always been an individual who prefers to remain silent and simply respond to the posts of others. My account is set to the best privacy setting available and, while I'm aware that the company has more access to my account than I'm aware of, I rarely post more than photographs of trips or the occasional new profile picture. Facebook to me is more a place to stay aware of the lives of those I would have otherwise lost touch with such as friends from public school and high school. It allows me to stay updated on their lives without keeping constant connection with those I'm no longer as close to. Facebook has also allowed me to reconnect to childhood friends and teachers, making it easier to pass on messages to people I had believed to no longer be in my life. Facebook Messenger is rarely used unless my phone is out of range or I am contacting those from a different country, making it simply another form of texting. Messenger is also used as another form of video calling or phone calling to relatives and friends throughout the world, similar to the concept of Skype. Through my privacy settings my profile is unavailable for viewing from search engines such as Google and through friends of mine I've learned that my profile is difficult to find even through the Facebook search bar. This difficulty gives me a sense of comfort in knowing that it is difficult for strangers to stumble across my profile at any given time.

Snapchat
Snapchat, a video and picture sharing app, is quite private to me. After its creation I refused to give in to peer pressure and popularity, however my move to another city for my university degree gave purpose to what I previously viewed as unnecessary. My friend at the time insisted I get the app so she would be able to constantly send me pictures and videos as she would no longer be able to show me pictures the next time I visited her. Although I have added a few more friends in the years since I've downloaded the app, my account remains private and has only been given to my closest friends as a means of staying in touch. It is through Snapchat that I often update my friends on my daily life and in turn hear their own stories of the moment. The instant connection associated with Snapchat has allowed for a connection across countries, making my various trips easier on our friendships due to the continual communication. Again, I am wary of what I send or take pictures of as I'm unaware as to how much control the company has over the photographs taken, but I still use the app quite readily for communication.

Instagram
Instagram is my newest social media platform. Before my trip to Scotland I was encouraged by two close friends of mine to get an account in order to post pictures of my adventures of the year. As my one friend does not have Facebook, I agreed to both get the account and update it with pictures of the things I saw. My account has no pictures of myself, the majority of the photo subjects being trips to various towns and places through Scotland. The account itself is based off of a username that has no connection to my personal name or information. My original followers were a few very close friends. Over the past few months I've gained more followers who are interested in photography and travel, and we exist in a mutual acquainceship through which we like each others' posts but have never personally interacted. Instagram to me has become a place of shared interest and passion for photography and travel, with little personal connection.

Youtube
I've had a Youtube account for about half of my life. I've never been interested in uploading videos or sharing my own stories online, but rather use it to track those whose videos I enjoy. I have several playlists through my account and while some are open to public eye, others are private and not available unless I'm logged into my account. Although Youtube allows for commenting, I rarely add to the discussions and prefer to peruse the comments adding an occasional "like" to comments I support or find amusing. My Youtube account is in no way connected to my name or personal information, allowing it to be hidden when my name is searched.

Email
My email accounts over the years have been created for specific purposes and audiences. While most children my age have their first, embarrassing email account name, the progression of school and age requires another account for more public uses. I still hold several accounts, but have them forwarded to the main three that I track through an app on my laptop. My first email, made at age nine, is often used for new accounts on websites. While it is in operation, it is rarely used anymore, often filled with junk mail. My second account is a family one made when I was slightly older. It is the account my extended family has access to and the account I use to contact my grandmother or aunts. My third email is the one I use most often for friends, resumes, and every day life. While I do have two more accounts, they are both school registered and were given to me with enrollment to my universities.

Information Available
My social media accounts, while in use by me daily, have little connection to my full name or my personal information. That said I still do appear when one Google's my name, it's just not through social media form. I have a few ancestry links done by extended family members in which I am mentioned. I also have an online record to my old track and field scores from my high school years. The main article that appears with my name is the link to my novel which was self published fairly recently. Aside from those few items, the only remaining links to me found through Google are old bulletins of science fairs I entered and events I volunteered at in the past.

Conclusion
While my name does appear when searched, the information displayed is basic at best and gives no real information as to my location or personal life. My social media accounts have been secured to the best of my ability and will hopefully remain that way. While I have nothing to hide on my social media accounts I still prefer to keep my information protected at all costs. Those I'm in contact with through social media are my closest friends, aside from acquaintances I've added on Facebook. While I'm aware of the abilities of larger companies to track my actions online, I'm fairly secure in knowing that I've done the best I can to secure my information. My online presence displays an extension of myself as well as a portrayal of my online identity. I feel that my online identity through social media I use is a shyer version of my true self. Privacy in the digital age is somewhat a myth, but there is little we can do to control the whole picture. The best we can do is limit what is posted of ourselves because once it's out there it's out of our hands.

Comments
Feel free to add your comments about any of my discussion - I look forward to hearing from you!

Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 23:51, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3 - Information Overload
A world full of information has been a concept that I've grown up with. While the internet was still expanding when I was a child, its information and availability grew as I did making so much possible for me as I got to the age where the internet became for research and school as much as gaming. I'm of the generation that automatically goes to Google for the answer to any question I may have. In my mind the internet is not an information overload, but rather a resource that has always been present in my life. It has greatly changed since I was a child, with more information than ever before and still growing daily. That said, since I grew up with information at my fingertips in that fashion, I grew up adjusting to the amount available to me and how to access and discover exactly what I need. It becomes not so much an information overload as a treasure hunt, digging through common ground until you find what it is you're looking for.

Information and Distraction
A large problem with today's availability of information is the distractions posed everywhere online. Today's websites, be it news, social media, entertainment, etc, are often framed by links to other parts of the internet, trapping individuals for hours. Click bait titles are so common they have become jokes of the internet, seeing which cliche title is the worst attempt to draw in readers. Websites such as Buzzfeed offer a variety of articles to choose from spanning real news to quizzes and videos. They cater to an audience and draw attention in every way possible. Normally I'm fine with this. If I'm looking to waste time on the internet I see no problem with click bait and external links. The fact is attention spans are often quite short and easily distracted by odd titles or pictures. We get drawn in. And we grow up and function in a world that is always connected and emphasizes the possibilities of the internet. We aren't taught to avoid exploration of the online world, but rather embrace it. Our obsession with this constant connection leads us to read these celebrity articles and scroll through social media constantly. This distraction and need for information has become second nature to us. It only becomes an issue when that distraction takes us from an important matter such as work. In those cases I often go to extreme lengths of using programs to block time-wasting websites on my laptop and shutting off my mobile. There are multiple programs with the same effect - you enter in the websites, set a time and date, and the internet pages are blocked until that time is up. When I'm reaching deadlines for papers or feel the real need to get work done I use a program to ensure that I can't waste my time on these websites. As sad as it may be, it's one of the only ways I know for a fact I'll focus on my goal and get my work done.

Contributing Factors
I think the fact that I grew up with the internet as a tool for entertainment over research tends to lead my mind astray when I'm online. As a child computers were solely used for games and communication. Websites dedicated to playing online and collaborating with friends trained me to associate computers and the internet with pleasure. That said, computers are a tool for entertainment. I'm not rejecting the idea that computers can be fun, but suggesting its sole purpose as a child has perhaps led my youth and young adult years to be misled by these previous uses. Now that I find myself needing to do research and studies with the internet, I still long for games, quizzes, and time-wasting websites in which my mind has little to do. I think it's because of this second nature that I have to shut down my link to these websites and turn off my mobile in order to focus on work and studying. I'm a bit odd for my generation in that I freely turn off my mobile multiple times per day. I'm still that kid who is obsessed with not hearing her phone go off in class or during the night. Unless I'm alone in a city on holiday or somewhere unknown, my phone will be off every night. That said, it does take a bit more of a conscious effort to turn it off knowing I'll be studying and free of distractions once I do. I tend to look to technology to distract me from my responsibilities. It's because of this I have a hard time completing my responsibilities through the internet. To me technology will always be fun and free - it takes work to remember there's a professional side to it all.

Workflow and Wiki
Workflow in regards to Wiki is more time consuming than other projects in that the connection isn't immediate. With other projects and collaborations, I work through group messaging on platforms such as Facebook. No matter where I am I can still get the messages through the app on my phone. Wikibooks is more difficult to manage as I have to consciously remind myself to check the discussion page as our group organizes the work we're trying to prepare. The class labs help in providing time dedicated to checking the page and offering opinion to organize everything. While the organization of the book overall has taken a fair bit more time than I am used to and/or would like, we seem fairly steady in our understanding of who is doing what section and things will hopefully run smoothly. The biggest challenge to workflow is remembering to check for any notifications or new comments and adjusting to whatever has occurred in the group.

Comments
Feel free to leave any comments!

A very interesting read and great layout! I notice that you say we're of the generation that automatically goes to google in a positive manner, but do you think there could potentially be drawbacks to this? I'm very much a lover of google, but I also feel that it sets up an expectation of instant gratification that can be discouraging when not lived up to. When browsing the library for research and sources, I find there is a higher level of dedication as you are actively searching for relevant material yourself. If I pick up a book and find it isn't what I need, I simply put it back and try again with another one. If however, the first google search result proves fruitless: it's now a lost cause. Do you find this yourself, or do you tend to take your usage with a pinch of salt? Let me know! LydiaWithTheFringe (discuss • contribs) 18:44, 2 March 2017 (UTC)


 * I feel like Google search gratification is dependent on the subject I'm searching. For example if I'm in a more scholarly pursuit, then I'm more likely to take my time and go through various links to find what I need. If however I'm searching for a certain fact, person, movie, etc then I'm more likely to be annoyed by a lack of the needed response. I also feel that the instant gratification that accompanies Google doesn't always translate well to other sources. You used books as an example. I feel like our generation is often more likely to skim through books and not thoroughly research physical material as we are unable to click a few buttons and do a word search for what we need. This is a negative in the decline of our attention span, but it's an adjustment that has accompanied the generational technological changes and it's not something easily altered. Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 00:49, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 00:35, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

I think the fact that I grew up with the internet as a tool for entertainment over research tends to lead my mind astray when I'm online.

I really like your thoughts on the ambivalence of the internet and I just love this sentence of yours, because it is sometimes so true! It is sort of really sad, that some teacher in the last years of high school have still actually to tell their students on how to use the internet to collect information and to show them what appropriate sources are. I sort of expect people to know by then taking into account that they got so far in their academic career. But the possibilities and the ubiquity of the internet and its access as well as the overload of information, useful and rubbish/entertaining one, is just too alluring.

--DesireeSophie (discuss • contribs) 08:28, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Organization
Wikibooks is platform designed for an information basis, not collaboration and group work. While projects were completed, collaboration and organization for a large group was a more difficult process. For many of us involved in our project, Wiki*edia is not in our nature to check as this class has been our first exposure to the platform and its potential. Through the lack of previous use, many of us forgot to check the discussion pages often which made it harder to organize the overall page and project. While class lab discussions in our groups were useful, the need to display our work through the discussion page added an extra job rather than simply discussing and presenting the project. The ability to ping and reply to members of our group or our class made the collaboration easier as we were able to note when a new discussion regarding our topic or section was being discussed after logging in; however the overall organization was messy at best as it became a waiting game for those members who were not continually checking or responding to the messages posted.

Information Sharing
As a platform based on information it was easy to share information through our group. Links to outside sources as well as other Wiki*edia pages were easily able to be displayed and pictures for our page were available for us to use. The only issue with information sharing through Wiki*edia is the need to knowledge of Wiki mark-up. While some took the time to understand and share the layout for these procedures, not everyone put in the same amount of awareness regarding how to cite, link, and source things. Although this did not effect the overall communication or feedback of the assignment, there was continual need to assure that people were linking sources as they were supposed to.

Theme Engagement
The theme of our Wikibook dealt with one of the first themes learned in class - Online Identity. Although our topic was specific to the identity one displays online versus the real life, that topic engages with several others discussed. Most recently we've discussed transmedia storytelling. This links to our topic through online gaming and how people can identify with characters and go so far as to select and play as said characters through multiple gaming platforms. Franchises such as Harry Potter offer multiple games for different platforms as well as websites for Fan Fiction and Internet Forums to further discuss not only the books, but the movies as well, also allowing for an extrapolation of the world and freedom to fill in the blanks. The website Pottermore was created as a forum specifically for the fans of the world, providing them a place to escape reality and join the wizarding world created by J. K. Rowling the author of the book series.

Similar to the multiple platforms and transmedia storytelling is the link to media convergence and always-on culture. The convergence of various systems tell a story and create multiple personalities. While our topic may not have dealt with Harry Potter or fandoms and franchises, we did discuss self-presentation (another topic from our class) and its portrayal through different platforms and devices. Apps we discussed (ie Snapchat, Instagram, and Facebook) all display different parts of one's identity dependent on those following and how one wants to portray themselves. The apps, while available on mobiles, all have websites associated with them and in the case of Facebook, they are directly linked in history of useage to computers and later laptops. The availability of the apps on our phones provides a sense of "always-on" and available, making it seem as though one should always be able to be contacted through their mobile device.

Conclusion
While the platform of Wikibooks is not ideal in communication and organization for group assignments, it is very useful in regards to information sharing and presentation. The contruction of a Wikibook takes time and continual collaboration in order to reach a point of completion and though our group did struggle somewhat in the final hours of the assignment, we all provided a fair amount of information in our chapter that created an in-depth perspective into the Online/Real Life Divide and covered various aspects that reflected all of our areas of interest.

Comments
Feel free to comment! Natashakirmse (discuss •contribs) 14:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC) Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi ! After reading your first point I thought, why should Wiki*edia not be available on more end-devices? With their (for us) unhandy way of using it regarding notifications. I am not suggesting that it should be completely accessible via an app on our smart phones and mobile devices, but it should somehow expand its functions in order to reach and engage more young users, hence it would be easier to reach/notify other people but not diminish the workload or engagement you have to put into the continual collaboration. Because another point of our always-online culture is somehow that whatever is not displayed on our mobile devices or visible for us, is out of sight and simultaneously out of mind. Thus, the Wikibooksproject was again a good opportunity to bridge the online and offline worlds consciously, because we had to schedule our real-life time to actually sit down and work on our online project as no distraction can be afforded to work efficiently. --DesireeSophie (discuss • contribs) 08:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)


 * you make a very valid point. I was often annoyed when out in public and unable to access the page and make comments on an on-going discussion through my phone. I was travelling during the reading week and found myself concerned with being unable to access the page needed to begin organizing our work for class. I think Wiki*edia is targeted more towards those who specify time for working on pages and sitting down to make the effort. Using this platform for a project made us wish for an easier way to see and reply to notifications, but if you consider those who do often edit and create pages on Wiki*edia, I feel like they prefer the scheduled time for this work. For those of us who do not often sit down at a computer for group collaborations, it was a jarring experience to be unable to instantly connect through our phones and be forced to wait for a response as well as remember to check for new notifications. Natashakirmse (discuss • contribs) 13:02, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Content (weighted 20%)
The introduction section is incredibly well-written, summarising many key points in relation to the subject matter. A concerted effort is made to communicate sophisticated ideas in a concise, summative way, before proceeding onto the main sections of discussion. The overall structure that follows is well thought out, and evidences deliberation, delegation and timely organisation. Coverage of many of the salient issues surrounding online identity are included, as well as some quite well-chosen examples and cases.

The actual content itself, in the discursive sections, is a little more patchy than what we expect after that Introduction, with some parts that are more superficial and descriptive, yet others that are clearly very well researched, developed, and thought through. The overall effect of this is fine, because as a whole, there is a clear aesthetic that you are writing a hybrid version of a collaborative essay, and an encyclopaedic entry.

There are some instances of typo errors, and a few formatting decisions that could have been better thought through. In addition, the repetition and ill-organisation in one or two subsections (especially the Tinder and Online Dating Websites section, where there is a lot of description, and not much application of theoretical material from the module – references to journalistic pieces on anonymity for example, where reference to good peer-reviewed sources would have given just as good information with obvious added value and opportunity. Anonymity appears in a couple of sections barely sentenced apart, and yet there doesn’t seem to be much joined-up thinking here, nor applying the concept to the section’s subject matter (Tinder and Online dating). Likewise, discussions of various applications repeat (e.g. Snapchat has a few sections specifically devoted to it. Some interwiki links joining up the various sections would have made more of the platform’s functionality.

The final main section, on AI is particularly interesting – it is fairly well structured, well researched, and draws from a wealth of different kinds of sources and materials – ranging from peer-reviewed sources, through journalism and popular cultural materials, to speculative and science fiction. This helps to close off the chapter in a way that establishes a sense of authority as well as being well-written, and therefore is an interesting read, on its own merits. Again, an interwiki link to join the section on Black Mirror with the previous section on the same topic would have been useful.

Referencing – good formatting, good range of sources and materials.


 * Excellent. Your contribution to the book page gives an excellent brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is an excellent 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 an excellent range and depth of subject matter.

Wiki Exercise Portfolio (Understanding weighted 30%)

 * 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.


 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of critical engagement with set materials, featuring discriminating command of a good range of relevant materials and analyses
 * evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material to a fairly wide degree
 * Argument and analysis:
 * well-articulated and well-supported argument through judgement relating to key issues, concepts or procedures
 * evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position);
 * evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections);
 * clear evidence of independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

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