User talk:Sarahsarah22

Hello, my name is Sarah. I am a french communication student in exchange at University of Stirling. I participate to a digital marketing class project on Wikibooks. Sarahsarah22 (discuss • contribs) 14:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki exercise #1 What make a good wiki?
Online collaboration is a way of contributing or cooperating to a project thanks to web tools on the web space with a group of persons. The aim of this collaboration is to create a set of tasks, a project or a source of knowledge that can be either private or public. This collaboration can be used for business purposes with the involvement of employees from the same company. This tools can also be useful for student project: workgroup, classmates and/or professors can use it to collaborate. The same goes for personal project with friends, family, community, or people that has commun interests. The online collaboration tools are much used nowadays thanks to technology’s popularization, this method gives the opportunity to contribute to a same project in real time without meeting each other.

Several collaborative social medias focus on a particularity, for exemple, Google Slides allow people to work on a presentation together, some of other platforms are used to program an event, Doodle and is one of them. The same goes for Skydive, people can have access to the same files, those tools works are saving times for co-workers but also for managers, it can create an involvement of all participants. Wikipedia isn’t a social media but it is one of the biggest key player in the sphere of the online collaboration. Wikipedia is running differently than Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn, indeed, on those social media, people are searching for interaction (searching old friends, looking for a job, debating hot topics..). On the contrary, Wikipedia is a platform where people are consuming or/and producing informations. Wikipedians can have the fonction of consumers and producers while having the same user name. The other difference of this platform compared to traditional social networks is the neutral point-of-views of every users, one of the four pillars of Wikipedia. The aim of this new form of virtual encyclopedia is to centralized neutral content thanks to voluntary users and their knowledges. The advantage of this website is the constante change and evolution of information over the years and new discoveries.

I have been using several social network and social media platforms to share ideas, tasks, interact with friends and family but also to communicate for companies during my internships. Indeed, I was working as a community managers, so I needed to use Hootsuite : the manager used to share tasks with other employees. Each category of posts was written by each of us. I was also using Google Drive for researches, ideas and Doodle for event’s organisations. I had the opportunity to edit a Wikipedia page. In the academic setting, I have been using Prezi and Google Drive (Google Slides, Google Docs…) to share tasks and create a value added presentation that anyone can improve by their knowledges and their skills. I find the Wikipedia environnement totally disconnected from the other social media, it has a sparse interface and a simple design with no predominant colours, in addition users don’t have photographies neither icon to make the ergonomic more efficient.

Lastly, I think that Wikipedia attracts consumers thanks to the easy access of informations. Regarding the producers or the wikipedias collaborators, I see them as volunteers working for an association: they all work to improve, and add informations by writing about what they know. Sarahsarah22 (discuss • contribs) 20:41, 7 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.


 * 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 post is at the lower end of this grade band, so there’s clearly 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 (especially for this, perhaps, the Understanding) criteria in the module handbook to get more of an idea of how to hit those targets. Where you are letting yourself down a little is in the finished piece - you really need to ensure that work is proofread prior to submission. Aside from this, you are clearly thinking about how to use the platform to communicate - your use of the functionality (e.g. pic files!) is really good, and you should extend this by using links embedded in your work. Your note that I find the Wikipedia environnement totally disconnected from the other social media - yes, I would totally concur, but of course with the full acknowledgement that wikis are not social media platforms, so a little more reflection and detail on the interface would be useful to negotiate its functionality (i.e. think about the purpose of wikis as distinct forms.)


 * Re: responses to other people’s posts – none undertaken. This would effectively halve your mark.

GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 15:23, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki exercise #2 Visibility and Data Trails
My social network’s accounts are in my name so I am easily findable by entering my name on a search engine as Google. Many of the first results are redirected to my pages’ links. I am visible on several social networks as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Youtube, Snapchat, LinkedIn and Google plus. Concerning my Tumblr account, I am not findable because I choose to not reveal my identity, this requires to use an other mail address that is unknown by friends and family. I am not mentioning neither my name nor personal informations, I make the choice to be anonymous on this platform because I used this social network as an entertainment, a source of inspiration as Pinterest. For most social networks, my basic personal informations are available on my page: name, city, age, school, workplace. I also have a profil picture for all of them unless Tumblr, a website which I choose to not give informations about me.

Facebook is one of the social network I spend the most of the time, I can communicate and share my experiences to people I am really closed to as my family, friends, and teachers that are worldwide, for this reason I give a lot of informations about where I live, what I do, who I spend time with, what my actual point-of-views about hot topics. On the contrary, I am not giving a lot of details and informations about my life on Twitter, people including me, tend to use this social network as a distraction, I use it for leisure, I’m often connected to Twitter to be informed of the trend topics of the day and follow personalities. I consider that the two communities have not the same expectation because we do not share the same things on Twitter and Facebook. Also, I have been witnessed of verbal altercations between people about their ages, names, races, so I do not want to share my personal informations with people I don’t trust or know to avoid this issue.

I set up all my account on « private » unless those that don’t suggest this option (Pinterest and Tumblr). My activity on those social networks are not visible to other users than my friends, family, co-workers, and people I allow to see my newsfeed… I define the word « activity » by publications and photos I post on my pages. I choose to share those informations about my life because in high school, my name was commun, more than hundreds of people had the same name as me so I wanted to be identifiable thanks to those informations. However there is an other reason, everybody wants to associate themselves to a place, a school or a job, I think there is also the way of how we wanted to be perceived by others. For example, I live in France but I spend 10 years in Morocco, i love this country and the culture, I’ve spend half of my life in the Kingdom and I wanted to be part of this community so I have mentioned it on the rubric « place i’ve lived » in my Facebook page.

Most of informations on Twitter and Facebook are under my control, I choose to have an account so I knew that I could be findable thanks to my mail address, but I could also choose to give my phone number instead of my mail address. Instagram is connected to Facebook so I have no choice of controlling my informations unless the account is private. Everyone can find my Snapchat user name with a phone number, it is up to every users to set up their account to prevents somebody watching your Snapchat Story.

For every social networks I have access to terms and policies so I can read all about informations that will be given to other users, the informations collected by the social network and how they use it. A lot of people including myself tend to accept terms and conditions without reading them, however we learn to moderate our activities on social medias thanks over time. --Sarahsarah22 (discuss • contribs) 18:11, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Comments on Wiki Ex #2
@Sarahsarah22 I agree with your reasoning for why unlike the rest of your social media accounts, you keep your tumblr separate from your real life, mainly due to its purpose as a platform for your entertainment. While I tend to separate things more from my real world Identity (my twitter, tumblr, youtube channel, ect) I understand the mentality behind it. I also agree with your reasoning behind leaving certain pieces of information open to the public. Everyone does want to be associated with a place they came from, people they enjoy, or places they’ve worked at.

But while I agree with you that yes, most information under your facebook is under your control in the sense that its you who chooses what get put out there in the first place, what happens to that information and who gets it is for the most part out of your control. You could easily remove a certain piece of information but someone could easily save it and repost it or they could find ways around facebook security measures to access it.

Lastly I do really enjoy your point about wanting to separate yourself from the many of the massive online arguments that can involve race/sex/politics/religion/ect, and using that as a reason to futher separate your account from your real world identity. BrianstirlingStudent (discuss • contribs) 23:33, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sarah, I completely understand about your reasoning behind keeping your Tumblr account private as this platform is one of the only ones that allow complete anonymity when it comes to commenting on posts and messaging people and it can be nice to get outside of your own world for a bit and not have to worry about being known or have to deal with judgement which can take place on many other social platforms as people judge your appearance your views, your activities and your likes and dislikes which can be extremely tough to handle.

In regards to your comments on why we put the things we do on social media down to how we want to be perceived by other people which is completely the reason I put some of the things up that I do. I find myself posting pictures of me and post statuses when I am happy and in happy situations but tend to stray away from all social media when I am having a hard time and ofter don't post for days until I feel better again which is down to the fact that I don't want people to thing that I am unhappy making them have this perception that I am happy all the time when that is not the case. I think people find it hard to post things that may show them in a different light than what they want to be shown and for a lot of people that have their entire lives online like famous youtubers, I have seen them post heart breaking videos about things that are happening in their lives because they feel they have to in order to be "real" with their followers. Do you agree that social media may cause us to pretend to be something we are not and if so do you think that it is necessary to be "real" with who follow us online? Justgabrielle (discuss • contribs) 10:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki exercise #3 Information Overload
Information overload is a phenomenon characterized by excessive informations received by a person who can not process all those informations. First, informations that I can perceive on social media or notifications of apps are usually chosen. For example, if I download an app that I am not so interested in, I will have the choice to turn off notifications on my phone. Concerning the social media, I really choose what I can see on my news feeds, if I see something that disturb me or someone who is constantly posting something uninteresting I would delete them or choose to delate the posts from my news feeds. I have a lot of choice with regard to social media. However, it started to be complicated with newsletter, advertising on TV, billboard, and chat messages. Of course, our brain can automatically select the billboard advertising we feel concerned about, however it is quiet difficult to get rid of TV advertising, newsletters and spam. I usually select mails that are important for me on my mailbox so I can sort in 3 different categories: social media (Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter), personal/professional and newsletters/ commercial mailings.

The worst experience of information overload I was I have encountered was during my internship in the parent company of an international group. Indeed, I was working as a communications assistant so I had to deal with employees of other countries, suppliers and external providers. I used to received more than a hundred mails per day. I had to deal with a lot of informations, so my strategy was to organise myself to process the information as soon as possible. More often than not, I stop my mail notifications when I was working on a projet, however I forced myself to read my mails every hour so I’ll be able to select which mail was important and which mail can wait 24 to 48 hours. The most difficult part of this large mass of information is to skip quickly from a subject to an other. I think this constant flow of informations come from our new culture, people are waiting for instantaneity, quick answers and high productivity. --Sarahsarah22 (discuss • contribs) 22:33, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki exercise #4 Wikibook Project Reflective Account
The subject of my Wiki group project was: Persistent Connectivity and the Fear of Missing Out. During this project we spend time sharing ideas on the discussion page of our Wiki book. 3 groups were working on the same topic, we had to share our viewpoints and the way we wanted to organize our work to achieve this project.

First of all, we all made researches and readings to try to connect several sub-sections of the topic given. After readings, each of us posted in our discussion group what we find more interesting to write about. We created sub-sections and each person had to write their name so we could know which person will be working on a subject. From this point, we started posting links we found interesting so other classmates will be able to work on the same sub-section together. Also, if someone found an article or a book useful for one the part of the Wiki book, we just had to post it in the right section for other people. Everyone has studied different subjects before this class, so we all have the opportunity to contribute to a same project with different knowledge and viewpoints.

Thanks to this Wiki project, we succeed in working all together, indeed, we certainly couldn’t have met and discuss about this project without the Wiki book discussion: we managed to communicate easily with the tag «@». Also by organizing the Wiki project discussion and dividing the discussion according to sections, we had comfortably communicate. We could also ask questions easily to our classmates to be sure of some informations, we also asked for operating rules to our classmates (for example: how to post an image).

Some difficulties came up, for example, images needed to be from Wiki Commons and not from personal screenshots or from Google. We had to read some of tutorials and explanation to share to our group the solution to our problems. In addition, we had some difficulties with the forming process that is different from a blog or a social media platform.

Participating and creating a content all together make us realized that collaborative work isn’t just about writing on a subject but also it provides us an added-value, indeed, working with much more persons make us think about our work, this is a good way to come back on our section and make modifications to improve informations about a subject. During this Wiki project, I contributed and have been engaged to this Wiki book, everyone had their place in the project and I felt being part of a team. --Sarahsarah22 (discuss • contribs) 19:35, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Content (weighted 20%)
The Introduction section here is a little perfunctory, but the main Concepts section is where all of the key sections are mapped out. Each section has its own descriptive short paragraph, summarising the discussion and concept in fairly neat and concise ways. The overall effect of this is that the chapter is given a sense of narrative and structure from the outset. Whilst the discussion in various sections doesn’t always live up to this, and there are one or two inconsistencies, this ought not to diminish too much for the achievements evidenced here.

As mentioned, the sections themselves generally contain good content, but there are inconsistencies regarding the strength of argument, and citation of sources. An obvious example of this would be the first history section, for which citation of sources doesn’t occur until the paragraph on the 1990s!

The unusual step of including a survey and posting the results here is an extremely useful one. Something that absolutely HAS to be thought through in ALL future work is that if one is conducting a survey (even if for demonstration purposes, as included here) or indeed ANY work with people, one must go through an ethics approval process – this is to ensure no harms (relative or absolute) occur for researchers or participants. This process will become more apparent later in the degree programme, particularly in final year projects. The use of interwiki links connecting all of the sections of the chapter together is both very useful and evidences good levels of project management, delegation of workflow, and joined-up collaboration. One thing that would have benefitted the chapter enormously, is if these interwiki links could have been extended to include more reference to other chapters in the book. For example, you have a subsection on Surveillance uses – there could have been interwiki links to various relevant sections in other chapters (especially, perhaps, Privacy in a Digital Age chapter).

Plenty of evidence of reading, secondary research and application of ideas from peer-reviewed sources, as well as other sources from popular culture and journalistic materials. This does tend to vary quite considerably from section to section, however, with some sections oddly drawing from newspaper online articles around topics for which there are materials available in the further reading lists (the subsections on internal effects, the Google effect and others, where there are some obvious aspects of that reading e.g. Vaidhyanathan and his book on the Googlization of Everything). Excellent section on FOMO.

The references section evidences research, reading and sharing of resources. However, the depth and range of sources could be considerably improved.


 * Satisfactory. Your contribution to the book page gives a satisfactory brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is a fair range of concepts associated with your subject, and an effort to deliver critical definitions. There is evidence that you draw from relevant literature and scholarship, however your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is slightly lost, perhaps due to a variable depth of understanding the subject matter or over reliance on rote learning. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover a somewhat circumscribed range and depth of subject matter.

Wiki Exercise Portfolio (Understanding weighted 30%)
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 overall (and particularly in relation to Understanding and Engagement elements), that should give you an idea of strengths and weaknesses within the achieved grade band, relative to the 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.


 * 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 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