User talk:Quincy1861

Hello, My name is Quincy.Quincy1861 (discuss • contribs) 13:32, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Exercise#2 To what extent are my online and offline identities aligned?
Personal image refers to the combination of public perception and evaluation of the individual. It is composed of external image and internal image and harmony, reflecting a person's appearance, etiquette and its inherent quality. The quality of personal image directly or indirectly affects the quality of interpersonal relationship. For individuals, a good image not only demonstrates personal charisma and inner self-cultivation, but also helps build harmonious interpersonal relationships, improve the social status and value of individuals. A good personal image is becoming more and more important in society. The external image and the internal image are complementary and mutually exclusive (Aouragh, 2011). While paying attention to external beauty, individuals should also pay attention to the improvement of their internal conservation, so as to build a good personal image. In the traditional communication mode, the personal image is mainly formed through face-to-face communication between people. We can share our life through various channels. In the digital media environment, with the continuous popularization of the Internet and the continuous diversification of network terminals, every ordinary user has their own online presence. For Facebook, Twitter, Whats-app, etc., as a new type of media that is extremely convenient and fast, it is theoretically building a personal image based on social media for each user. Compared with other media, this type of social media has its own characteristics in shaping and disseminating users' personal image (Buckinghams, 2007). Socialized personal image communication platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, are highly socialized, and they aggregate personal homepages, blogs, emails, instant messaging tools and more. Its socialization is manifested in several dimension. First, the spread of radiation is more social than other media, and its social coverage is broader. Most releases on Twitter, including forwarding and commenting, are usually not specific between two communicating objects, and are often disclosed to other followers and netizens as if they were a microphone. The broadcast effect is reflected in two aspects. One is a point-to-face stage-based discourse dissemination platform for users to publish information, and the language published by people on Facebook is more extensive. Second, the identity of the participants is more social. The use of low thresholds and convenient operation allow everyone to participate, enabling social platforms to accommodate more ordinary people and carry more voices from all walks of life (Zhao, Grasmuck & Martin, 2008).

The reason why social platforms can be called media is that all published content except for private messages is open to the attention and other netizens. It has the characteristics that the media transmits information from a source of information to a certain number of audiences. Facebook can be an important part of social media, and its content can be freely created by any social person. Its communication is based on the attention of the social relationship chain, rather than the professional and institutionalized communication of traditional media (Larsen, 2007). Facebook's socialization characteristics determine that Facebook users are shaping and spreading their personal image on a social platform. In real life, I am a boy who is biased towards introversion. But when I shape my personal social media image, I tend to set it up as a positive male image, showing my own preferences of risk-taking and freedom. In my opinion, it will be easier to reap the attention of others. This is different from face-to-face communication.

The emergence of digital social media is tantamount to providing each potential user with a free stage to satisfy their self-expression. As long as the performance does not harm others, does not violate the law, and does not violate the public order, people can obtain self-expression. It can be said that the raising of social media has aroused people's long-standing desire to be suppressed and shrunk in the traditional media environment. Of course, it is also performed on this stage. The result is different (Marwick, 2013). Some people may just talk to themselves. Some people may show themselves as a person without paying attention. In general, high-density, sustained performance tends to attract more attention.

I tend to show my free mind on social platforms. In my opinion, compared to face-to-face communication, I am more real, self-contained on social platforms and some self-media expressions. I think this will give people a feeling of affinity. This kind of realism is more likely to increase my personal influence and trust more friends and followers.

In face-to-face interpersonal relationships, our first impression of a person begins with hairstyle, looks, and dress. In the social platform, I think that the user's external image is mainly reflected by the personal image in his home page. In the middle and high school period, my social platform avatar likes to choose a trendy cartoon image to create a certain imagination space, which is more attractive and fashionable. As I entered the university, I began to choose some of my own travel photos to replace the original image. In my opinion, direct use of live-action photos can present an accurate and realistic user image, making people feel that I’m honest and real. This kind of decision is also affected by my friends since increasing number of my friends utilized the personal image for showing themselves.

In the self-introduction sub-item, the user spontaneously and subjectively uses the text information to make a self-awareness and setting. The page can speed up the understanding of others by text description and tag categorization. Self-introduction is the first text content that netizens read on Facebook. Well written self-introduction can also give visitors a good impression at the first time. Self-introduction succinctly and clearly expresses "who am I" and "what do I have?", highlighting the main message of the image shaping the subject. On my social media homepage, I wrote down my own school and identity. As I change my life at different stages, I often update my personal status. In addition, I also showed my personal hobbies. My humanities users choose the most appropriate keywords based on their personal style and content. They can help users find users faster when they search for content or find people. They can also help users to know friends with similar hobbies more quickly and further expand the personal network.

Whenever and where, in what way, anonymous or real name, reality is still online, and what to say, how to say, in fact, is basically what kind of self. It can be said that the social image of Twitter, Facebook and other social platforms is based on content winning. If the home page is the carrier of the content, people can use Facebook's own template, or apply for a homemade image, so that the relationship chain on Facebook actively covers each new media platform. In terms of Twitter content, I usually record daily thoughts and moods, forward or comment on other people's interesting graphics, write down what's happening around me, record what I do every day, chat with friends, spread ideological education and influence others. It's more fun to initiate or participate in discussions on a hot topic, post messages and pictures, live events, post articles, or other works. It's not hard to see that the content in Twitter can be almost all-encompassing. From personal to social, from public news to private mood, its content presents three-dimensionality and diversity, which is the most important reason why Twitter can attract many users to participate.

On the front line of online social media, I am more inclined to show a humorous image. When writing a post, I will choose to incorporate humorous elements at the right time, such as forwarding humorous graphics, self-deprecating humor, etc., or humorous analysis of serious content, homemade jokes and so on. In addition, in the social platform, in addition to humor, warm words filled with true feelings will resonate with people. I sometimes use my own personal experience to share the happiness and warmth of real feelings as Weibo content. Not only can I increase my happiness, but also let more people feel happy (Gilpin, 2010). The reliance on the content category to the choice of form, the macro-microblogging release purpose and the micro-text expression reveal the blogger's personality and style. In terms of wording, I generally do not use written language, but use the tone of my usual chat to communicate and change the tone according to the content in a timely manner. For example, serious topics should strive to be precise and clear in language expression, and humorous topics can use rhetoric to increase expression. Of course, no matter which style, it should be a sincere disclosure, not a deliberate show. The biggest feature of the social platform is the freedom. It has the widest voice and expression right without precluding the law and without deviating from morality. This makes the social media themselves often free from the constraints of real life, free to present a different self on the platform of relaxed atmosphere and convenient speech.

The social trend and friends’ performance impacted the online identity of myself as well. I try to maintain a positive image of myself, constantly catching up the trend. It is believed that online presence of individual is totally different the face-to-face community presence, which allows people to gain more freedom in expression.Quincy1861 (discuss • contribs) 21:14, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Reference List
Aouragh, M. (2011). Palestine online: Transnationalism, the Internet and construction of identity (Vol. 90). IB Tauris.

Buckingham, D. (2007). Youth, identity, and digital media (p. 216). the MIT Press.

Gilpin, D. R. (2010). Working the Twittersphere: Microblogging as professional identity construction. In A networked self (pp. 240-258). Routledge.

Larsen, M. C. (2007). Understanding social networking: On young people’s construction and co-construction of identity online. Internet Research, 8, 18-36.

Marwick, A. E. (2013). Online identity. A companion to new media dynamics, 355-364.

Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in human behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836.

User Comments
I think your essay has a very clear and understandable format. You address each question in the essay topic in an effective and thorough manner using personal examples. I was really touched by your piece not only do you have excellent writing mannerism, you used very good references. I thought the piece about how good personal image is apart of society was spoken very true. I also highly enjoyed your thought about how external beauty is what we share with others not only on social media but in person. We are always leaving impressions with others that causes individuals to raise an internal conversation with themselves about what their identity is. Furthermore, your essay was very critically addressed and cultivated. One final thing I would have added to fit all the criteria of the assignment is to add photos that help depict your topics. Cornelius06 (discuss • contribs) 13:58, 13 March 2019 (UTC)Cornelius06

I think that what you have written is very interesting. I liked and agreed with the quote you used from Buckinghams which talked about how social media shapes and disseminates the user's personal image. I also found the point you made about Twitter being a microphone that broadcasts the user's communications. I also think that it broadcasts their image as well as they craft and interact with Tweets which ultimately helps form their identity. I also agree and can relate to the point you made about social media being a free platform for satisfying self-expression, and I would add that it also helps shape our online and offline identity because if we weren’t satisfied with our self-expression online I think that it would show in our on and offline lives. In regard to the point you make about the freedom of the internet, I would challenge you by asking just how free are we on the internet? I think some users are limited because they are so preoccupied with showcasing their ideal self online and they don’t necessarily feel like they have the freedom to be 100% themselves. I think there are also some limitations with the freedom of what we can post, because while social media is a platform for as you put it “ the widest voice” I would sort of disagree with you. There are certain things morally and ethically and just within the societal social media “rules” that would not allow you or would hold you back from posting certain things because they would be deemed unethical, immoral, or just wrong. I’m curious about what your thoughts on this are? Bojackpopsocket (discuss • contribs) 10:47, 16 March 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Annotated Bibliography Exercise (Part B)
'''Peck.D.(2018). What Is Impression Management And How Can It Be Abused? Available at : https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/general/what-is-impression-management-and-how-can-it-be-abused/ Accessed: 3/21/2019'''

In this article, Peck proposed the definition of impression management, examples of impression management behavior in social interaction and impression management in advertising. The author cited a number of sources and real-life examples to help people have a better understanding of impression management and prevent the cheating of impression management in advertising. The authors' emphasis is help people make a right chose and establish a healthy lifestyle in psychological level. His article is very helpful for our group's further research, as Peck consider impression management is abused in our daily life. The main limitation of the article is that the example of abuse of impression management is not enough. In addition, the article lacked specific data. Thus, author expressed the purpose of this article is to let people have a preliminary understanding of impression management in order to know yourself correctly. In conclusion, this article will not form the basis of our research; However, this article put a lot of ideas which will enlighten our later work, we can follow this to lucubrate the abuse of impression management and solution.

Exercise#4 Collaborative Essay Critical Evaluation – What ARE Wikis?
Wikibooks is a platform hosted by Wikimedia Foundation, providing free content e-books, textbooks and annotated text, which allows everyone to edit on line. Initially it was launched to help them rebuild Free textbooks about organic chemistry and physics. Wikijunior and Wikiversity are the two major sub projects created within Wikibooks before the change of official policy. Wikijunior provides books specializing for children, consisting of magazine websites and magazines in different languages. Wikibooks advocates annnymous users. Users are only provided with IP addresses when editing. In terms of the page editing, the page resources will demonstrate the IP address from which people made the editing process.

Compared with traditional textbooks, the traditional textbook publishing cycle is too slow, and the new content will take a long time to review before it can finally appear in the textbook. With the rise of wiki textbooks, we can see that a lot of things on the Internet are beginning to appear in textbooks. Wikibooks can open up a new way for students to learn, because this model can modify content information in real time, which makes research quite convenient. And students can also participate in the construction of textbook content. For example, a teacher can ask students to check the accuracy of the content of the entry, and then add their findings into the wiki textbook, which can make the Wikibook project a teaching tool. In addition, students have to spend a lot of money to purchase textbooks. With wiki textbooks, students can print the materials they need at any time. In short, wiki textbooks can achieve some of the teaching functions that are not possible with existing textbooks. This greatly facilitate the collaborative research process.(Collaborative research on Wikiversity,2018)

Due to its open nature, any registered user is able to edit existing content. This means that anything can be tamper-evident. In addition, the learning of certain knowledge categories requires multimedia, which goes beyond the coverage of basic wiki software tools. For example, one is learning German, there is no way to learn German only from textbooks, but also to learn the language from voice CDs and games. As wiki textbooks are constantly evolving, as its capacity grows larger and larger, and more and more people use it, the people who are interested in it will become wider and wider. Then, one day it might replace the traditional textbook model. Users in Wikibooks are free to choose to use anonymous, pseudonyms, or to edit entries directly with their true identity. Users can add what they think they are appropriate to at any time while reading an entry. In addition, the number of registrants and administrators varies widely, and most inappropriate editorial results can only be waited for another editor to wiki textbooks to detect and correct. It can be seen that the spirit of the Wikibook community has always been the spirit of freedom and openness, but it is this freedom and openness that has brought obstacles to the quality inspection and control of content. In Wikibooks, the most common and obvious types of damage to content include the insertion of false information, advertising speech, highly partisan opinions, self-context statements, inaccurate words, ideological bias and meaningless words, etc. The less common destructive actions include toughly modify the content of your favorite format, the page semantics that destroy the title of the item or the interpretation in the classified page, or even modify the underlying code of the item directly. In the past, the textbooks were written by experts from various fields, reviewed and peer-reviewed. This method of compilation has greatly reduced people's concerns about content quality. The Wikipedia textbook itself has the characteristics and user characteristics that make it more disruptive and more feasible than traditional textbooks. This has made Wikibooks face a unique challenge for a long time, namely content quality.(Collaborative research on Wikiversity,2018)

Collaborative knowledge production is also allowed. The traditional author-centered writing style consists of three main parts: planning, writing, and revision. There is no strict order relationship between the three links and there are repeated iterations. Collaborative knowledge production is based on personal writing, including more people, more opinions, more complicated writing methods, multi-person participation based on the same goal, and iterative achievement of goals through social activities such as negotiation and communication. Repeated writing process. This process mainly includes writing strategies, writing activities, control and work patterns, and role diversification. Internet collaborative knowledge production activities mostly adopt a hierarchical writing strategy and a reactive writing strategy, that is, after creating a certain content, group users will adjust the content according to the changes and additions of each user in the group, and there is not a large amount in the process in terms of pre-planning and clear coordination. The control of content mainly adopts the common control mode, which means that all members of the group have the same equal rights in the writing process. In the collaborative knowledge production community, users can decide the content, process and role to be contributed according to their own interests, professional experience, specialties, etc. Users who participate in collaborative knowledge production naturally constitute a community, and the community will serve this community. Which provides a simple communication tool for the group.Quincy1861 (discuss • contribs) 20:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Reference List
Collaborative research on Wikiversity. Available at: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Collaborative_research_on_Wikiversity. Accessed:4/3/2019

INSTRUCTOR FEEDBACK: ENGAGEMENT ON DISCUSSION PAGES & CONTRIBS
Grade descriptors for Engagement: Engagement on discussion pages, and contribs of this standard attain the following grade descriptor. Whereas not all of the elements here will be directly relevant to your particular response to the brief, this descriptor will give you a clearer idea of how the grade you have been given relates to the standards and quality expected of work at this level:
 * Poor. Among other things, poor contributions may just offer links without real comment or apparent point. They may offer nothing more than poor-quality synopsis or description of material of dubious relevance. They may have serious clarity problems (including dead links, random graphics) which affect comprehension (or even worse, admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement). They might be off-topic, private trivia, or of unclear relevance. The wiki markup formatting will be of a poor standard.

As instructed in the labs, and outlined in the assessment brief documentation, students should be engaging at least once a day, for the duration of the project. The following points illustrate how this engagement is evaluated.

Evidence from contribs to both editing and discussion of content (i.e. volume and breadth of editorial activity as evidenced through ‘contribs’). These are primarily considered for quality rather than quantity, but as a broad guideline:
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 3000+ characters are deemed “considerable”
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 2000+ characters are deemed “significant”
 * Each item on a contribs list that are 1000+ characters are deemed “substantial”
 * Items on a contribs list that are <1000 characters are important, and are considered in the round when evaluating contribs as a whole because of their aggregate value

Overall:
 * Aside from one contrib that could be considered substantial by the above criteria, there are a small number of smaller contribs across the project period. These are fairly inconsistent although do evidence a willingness to engage and there are a couple of useful discussion exchanges here.

Engagement with and learning from the community on Discussion Pages
 * Evidence of peer-assisted learning and collaboration
 * Poor
 * Evidence of reading, sharing, and application of research to the essay
 * Poor
 * Evidence of peer-review of others’ work
 * Poor

Reflexive, creative and well-managed use of Discussion Pages
 * Clear delegation of tasks
 * Poor
 * Clearly labelled sections and subsections
 * Poor
 * Contributions are all signed
 * Poor

Civility. Your conduct is a key component of any collaboration, especially in the context of an online knowledge-building community. Please respect others, as well as observe the rules for civility on wiki projects. All contribs are moderated.
 * Satisfactory

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 16:04, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback on Wiki Exercise Portfolio
Posts and comments on other people’s work, of this standard, roughly correspond to the following grade descriptor. Depending on where your actual mark is in relation to the making criteria as outlined in the relevant documentation, it should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band overall:


 * 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.


 * This work is at the lower end of this grade band, so there’s some room for improvement here. I think in order to engage with the wiki exercises a bit more, it might be useful for you to look at the Grade Descriptors and criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Also, making more use of the wiki functionality and markup would have gone quite a long way to improving fluidity and functionality of posts. I suspect that, if you become more familiar and proficient with the platform, that this would make a difference.


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – these are fairly good, although there is one required peer-review element (Ex4) missing. 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.

General:
 * Reading and research: evidence of critical engagement with set materials; evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material – all fairly good.


 * Argument and analysis: well-articulated and well-supported argument; 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); evidence of independent critical ability – all good.


 * Presentation: fair use of wiki markup and organisational skills – there is room to improve this though.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 16:52, 1 May 2019 (UTC)