User:1013- katie/archive

My Project
I would like to expand the Wikipedia Article Stub The Ocean Conservancy.  The Ocean Conservancy is a not- for- profit organization that works to make oceans wild and healthy again. They do so by creating more public awareness of ocean issues. I think it is an good topic to write about because the cause The Ocean Conservancy works towards is a very important issue, oceans are in danger, the animals who call the oceans home are in danger. If these ocean issues aren't resolved, more serious problems could start to arise. If more people could understand the issues, then hopefully it could prevent any more damage to occur and even start to correct those problems. Some articles I could be interested in using as a model all include history, their causes/ efforts, etc. All are non- profit organizations that use that style of organization. Some topics I could link in my article are: They all have direct connections to the main subject of The Ocean Conservancy.
 * Federal Emergency Management Agency
 * the YMCA
 * Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
 * Amnesty International
 * National Coastwatch Institution
 * the United States Commission on Ocean Policy
 * Fisheries
 * By-catch
 * Marine Protected Area
 * not-for-profit organization


 * Thoughts from Josh. Katie, this sounds like a good project. Keep thinking about what kind of information you will include. Remember, your final article needs to be 1500-2000 words of concise encyclopedic material. Clearly, there is much more information out there about Federal Emergency Management Agency or Amnesty International than about The Ocean Conservancy. You may want to see if others have managed to write 1500-word articles on non-profit organizations of the Ocean Conservancy's size and scope. What kind of material have they included? Will you be able to find references other than the Ocean Conservancy's website? If you have any questions about your project proposal, write me a note here, and write "QUESTION FOR JOSH" in the edit summary box when you hit the "save page" button. I'll stop by later to answer. 1013-josh 19:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, that is a good point Josh. My research isn't producing many outside sources. Do you think I might as well just find another topic, one that has book sources or just more outsides sources in general? Thanks for the help... 1013- katie 00:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * We're going to talk about research tomorrow in class, so let's re-evaluate then. I haven't done a search myself, but I have a hunch that newspaper articles may be a great resource for you, and I'll show you tomorrow how to look for them. If you can find newspaper articles about various projects or programs the Ocean Conservancy has been actively involved with, you may be able to write a section for each program, which could be enough to make a good article. Let's talk tomorrow. I'll have extended office hours after class if you want to meet, or you can just do some thinking on your own, and let me know what you decide. 1013-josh 00:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Josh, I am just working on researching the topic of Marine Conservation Activism, but also I am kind of trying to get a rough outline of my paper. I am thinking I will have 3-4 "issues" that the activists work towards fixing, then writing two sections, one on what the activists try to do to fix the issues and one on past and current cases with maybe a section on some examples of areas that have been helped through activism. Just thought I would check if that would be a good idea. Also, I kind of feel like what I am doing is the same as Marine Conservation! Hopefully you will disagree! thanks for the help, 1013- katie 02:18, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I think that sounds like a good starting point. I'm a little unclear on the distinction between your two sections, but I think you should go with however it makes sense for you to organize the material. You could organize the material chronologically, or by issue, or by group, or by case. I'll have more comment when I see how your article is coming into shape. As for Marine conservation vs. Marine conservation activism, I agree that there is considerable overlap, and you may find that Wikipedia users will suggest merging the articles. If that happens, it will become a conversation about what the Wikipedia community thinks is the best way to organize the material -- and you get to be part of that conversation. I think you can write the article in such a way as to set yourself off from Marine conservation. One way to think about the difference is by looking at Soil conservation, which is defined in the first sentence as "a set of management strategies." You might think about Marine conservation the same way, as a question of science, management, legislation, and policy. Marine conservation activism could be focused on the history of activism and not so much on management science. Think Sea Shepherds, not Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization. Does that make sense? 1013-josh 03:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I think I understand what you mean. More about the non-governmental efforts and more about independent organizations like sea shepards and Blue Frontier Campaign. I have a book written by the founder of the campaign David Helvarg, so that is a possiblity but I am having trouble finding other sources, even online and with the resources you gave. I think it is because I don't know any other organizations. Do you have any ideas for finding other organizations like Sea Shepards and Blue Frontier? Oh, and I think you are right, organizing it chronologically or by issue is what I will do as soon as I can research more efforts I will be able to figure that out. 1013- katie 21:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Looking good so far. How about this as a first paragraph to help you set yourself off from Marine Conservation?


 * Marine Conservation activism refers to the efforts of non-governmental organizations and individuals to bring about social and political change in the area of Marine Conservation. Marine conservation is properly conceived as a set of management strategies for the protection and preservation of ecosystems in oceans and seas. Activists raise public awareness and support for conservation, while pushing governments and corporations to practice sound ocean management, create conservation policy, and enforce existing laws and policy through effective regulation.


 * That may help you define your article and fend off calls from Wikipedia users to merge your article with the existing article. Just an idea. You can adapt it as you see fit. As for finding more organizations, I would start at Marine Conservation, Environmental organizations, Conservation movement, and Environmentalism, especially the section at the bottom, Environmental Organizations and Networks. You may also look at Environmental movement in the United States, as the United States has one of the longest traditions of environmental activism, though your article will have an international focus.


 * Also, check out the links at the bottom of this page. I found that about in thirty seconds of googling, so I'm sure you can dig up some more leads.


 * The reason the formatting on your project draft looks funny is that you've created a blockquote tag "without an end blockquote tag" that tells Wikipedia to stop blockquoting. You can fix the formatting just by removing the first blockquote tag.


 * Good luck and stay in touch if you have any questions. 1013-josh 18:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey Josh, I was wondering if you could tell me if my formatting of footnotes on my page Marine conservation activism is correct! thanks for the help, 1013- katie 02:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You're close. Your Wikipedia coding is good, and you even get fancy with #8. Nice work. But you're using a "References" (a.k.a. "Bibliography" a.k.a. "Works Cited") format, when you should use a "Footnote" style format. Go to your Hacker CMS-4c, and look at the Rehnquist example. The main differences are that the footnote style (a) has the author's first name before the last name, (b) uses commas, and (c) puts the publication information in parentheses. Bibliography style (a) has the author's last name first, (b) uses periods, and (c) doesn't use parentheses. Why does it matter? Doesn't matter to me, and it doesn't matter to most people on Wikipedia, but it does matter to some people in your other university classes, and I want to make sure you're dressed right when you go to the research paper party. Also look at CMS-4c to see how the entries are formatted. Sometimes you have italics when you need quotes, etc. I'm going to redo footnote #7 for you to see how I change it. It's an article in a newspaper, so you would look it up in your Hacker under CMS-4c-18 to see how it should be formatted. I'm happy to see that you have all the information a reader would need to look up the article -- which is 90% of what matters -- but the other 10% is the window dressing, and you're not quite there yet. 1013-josh 03:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Question for Josh- I added something to Nicks Pillsbury "A" Mill article (the future of the mill section) and it doesnt show up. in the history it does but not when i try to look at it/ it didnt when i previewed my changes either! what's up with that? 1013- katie 03:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Fixed. You had the formatting slightly wrong on the footnotes you added. One of the footnotes wasn't closed properly, and Wikipedia got confused. See Nick's page history to see what I did. 1013-josh 04:38, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Workshop: Marine conservation activism
Workshop Guidelines

Hi, I've just had a look over your interesting article and I thought I'd make a few suggestions. It would be a very good idea to look at some marine conservation movements outside of the US; online, the easiest research is going to be for other English-speaking countries like Canada, the UK, Australia, India, South Africa etc. It would be great if you could mention at least one regional issue for every continent. Another way to research international activism would be to look into the global coalitions of groups that helped pass international environmental treaties specific to marine conservation. It would also be a good idea to look at Neutral point of view; some of your discussion of groups might be a little too much on one side, with phrases like "literally thousands of supporters". A way to get around this is to look for more sources from different perspectives (for example, different newspaper articles in addition to looking at the group's website). About referencing, it's very important to replace the links to Lexis-Nexis, which is a commercial service that not everyone has access to, with the names of the actual documents that you consulted. That way, anyone can look them up. Also, it's a very bad idea to reference another Wikipedia article; please consider having a look at the primary and secondary sources that the Sea Shepherd article itself cites instead. Thanks for your article.--Pharos 04:31, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've nominated an article you worked on, Marine conservation activism, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the "hook" for the article at Template talk:Did you know where you can improve it if you see fit. 1013-josh 22:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I think you’re off to a good start here. This is an important subject but a challenging one to write about because it is so broad and also because your research is taking you in so many directions. I recognize that it can be hard to dig up information about the history of marine conservation activism when looking up “marine conservation” in a library catalog gets you thousands of hits but “marine conservation activism” gets nothing. You have to think creatively, and I’m happy to see that you’re rising to the challenge. Keep trying to distinguish yourself from marine conservation. I wouldn’t give your article a section header called “activism,” for example, because the whole thing is supposed to be about activism. I think organizing your material around topics is a good decision, but I think you can do more within those sections to distinguish between governmental agencies and regulatory bodies (such as the International Whaling Commission) and the activists who work on those issues. So we’re not concerned here with what the laws are so much as we are concerned with the role of activists in fighting for those laws and making sure those laws are enforced. I think you can do more to tell a story about activism that makes clear the distinction between activist approaches to marine conservation and other kinds of approaches. Regarding the concern about making your article international in scope, it’s true that some of the issues and organizations you mention are international, but your article does still have a US bias. You don’t necessarily need to cover activism in every part of the world. Other Wikipedia editors can expand on your work. But when you do cover activism in the US, you should acknowledge that you are talking about the US, so that you don't imply that your statement covers the whole world. For example, you write, “Though the environmental movement began in the 1960s, the idea of marine conservation really didn't take off until the 1972 Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) passed, beginning the movement. The act allowed the regulation by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over dumping in the seas." This could be revised to read “Though the environmental movement began in the 1960s, the idea of marine conservation activism really didn't take off in the United States until the 1972 Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) passed. The act allowed regulation by the United States’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over dumping in the seas, which was the first time a government agency regulated international waters.” I don’t know if that last bit is true, but you should find out. When you say “beginning the movement,” do you mean this was the beginning of the movement worldwide? If so, say so. If not, acknowledge that you’re talking about the beginning of the United States movement. Does that make sense? I also think Pharos’s points about NPOV are good. You’re writing an encyclopedia article, so you should be wary of relying heavily on the websites and brochures of the activist groups or sounding like a promotional outlet for them. This article, when it’s complete, will cover more ground than you can do alone during the time we have for this project. So don’t worry about covering every regional issue. But do try to give us a good solid foundation that other users can build on. Good work and good luck! 1013-josh 05:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

You're on the Main Page!

Hi Katie, your article was featured on the Main Page of Wikipedia in the "Did You Know?" fact box for 6+ hours this morning. You may have had some strangers stopping by your article as a result, so check the page history. 1013-josh 17:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Participation: Katie
So far today I have worked on Nick's page. 1013- katie 23:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixed several typos
 * Changed some words in an effort to make the sentences stronger
 * Asked nick about a sentence i was not clear about, encouraged a change
 * Made a new section, the FUTURE of the mill

1013- katie 02:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * suggested websites for shishi

On Davids article, 1013- katie 03:02, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I formatted the footnote to the correct style in the hacker handbook
 * On the ref which is used twice, I used the ref name= formatting to group the reference to one footnote.

On Nicks article, 1013- katie 03:51, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I added new info on the future of the mill
 * I added a few footnotes from my research

Homework
Josh, I've finished the homework. 1013- katie 00:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I have added a sentence and changed one for Erin Brockovich (film). 1013- katie 17:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Good work. Remember to add a comment to the edit summary box to make it easier for other users to follow your changes. You may want to add the film page to your watchlist so you can see what becomes of your changes. 1013-josh 05:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Josh, I am fine with all of the concerns discussed on Wednesday! 1013- katie 02:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, great! Let me know at any time if you change your mind and would like to switch to an off-line research assignment. Did you see Pharos's comment below about your project? 1013-josh 07:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Josh, I have started my draft, I really didn't address the examples yet, however, but i started my format. 1013- katie 02:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Good start. See my comments in your project section above. 1013-josh 18:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey Josh, I've finished the rough draft, but i can't figure out my footnotes, and i think i messed up my citations a little but I will work on that hopefully before class or before the 2o'clock rule. I'll leave another note once I have my footnotes figured out! 1013- katie 08:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Good work. I think you're ready to transfer over to the mainspace. I prepped your draft for the move, and tomorrow I'll help you copy it over. The reason your after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! ——  Eagle 101  Need help? 16:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi katie. If covering just one organization is too narrow, you might want to consider a broader topic. Marine conservation is a bit longer than your professor's suggestion, but marine conservation activism (an article covering the history of environmental campaigns for marine conservation) is still unstarted.--Pharos 05:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)