User:Cavaliergirl96/NMAC 3108 Journal

Journal Week 8: July 23, 2019 - Reflecting on the semester
When I registered for this class, I went in with my best attitude, fingers crossed that I would complete everything on time and learn a few things. I did not think the good things I learned, though small, would be significant. In spite of my original feelings, this class has been meaningful to me.

Interacting with classmates
I'm glad some of my suggestions were helpful to other classmates. A lot of the coding was difficult for me; I felt like a 70-year-old trying to use facebook for the first time, or like a giraffe on stilts. What made it even more difficult was that I could not phrase my problems into questions. I could have asked for help, but I did not know what I needed to ask. However, figuring out how to format certain things was almost as satisfying as being able to help someone else fix their formatting. As I was researching my own topic, I would occasionally run across information related to other classmates' articles. It felt good to share those resources with them.

Evaluating an article
Evaluating the Home School Legal Defense Association article was fun until I had to go in and make corrections. At that point, I'd experience my brain's version of the blue screen of death and I'd have to tell myself that feeling anxious about making small corrections is dumb. I was scared I'd make a mistake. I worked through it, clearly, but it was irritating.

Adding to an article
After realizing my fear of making mistakes would affect this class (as though it hasn't affected every other class I've taken in college,) I was able to push the fear aside and just write. I enjoyed that I could only write facts and not give any kind of argument in my article. It was refreshing, especially after writing my research paper for my capstone class last semester. I just had to write the facts in my own words and cite them with credible sources.

Wikipedia appreciation
I know I have mentioned this in previous journal entries, but I have developed a deeper appreciation for Wikipedia. I always considered it a source of fairly-accurate information, but not accurate enough to quote in a scholarly paper. Although I still believe both are true, I never knew the care that went into each article. Strangers on the internet come together to create articles with the most accurate, up-to-date information they can find. There is no monetary motivation. It isn’t self-interest or self expression that drives most of these contributors, like it might for someone who writes a personal blog. No, these people spend time researching and editing articles simply for the love of knowledge and their chosen topic. I respect that.

Getting to know Simri Rose
Another thing that was meaningful about the research project was that I got to know Simri Rose. His first name originally was Zimri, but he didn't want to have to be called Z. Rose (like zeroes). Understandably, he changed his name. I laughed the first time I read that fact.

I am part of a small number of people who know about Simri Rose and appreciate his contributions to the Rose Hill Cemetery. He definitely deserved to be the cemetery's namesake because his passion for the project was clear in everything he said. Visiting his grave brought it home to me that he really was a real person who worked hard to create a beautiful place in Macon. A place that people have appreciated in the past and will continue to appreciate in the future.

The idea of "home"
I suppose it’s an odd question to consider, but this idea of “home” was knocking around in my head for most of the project. I have always lived in Jones County, but it never felt like home to me. Most of the big moments in my life have happened in Macon. Macon is home to my friends, my university, my church, my favorite restaurants, etc. And yet, Macon is no more my home than Jones County. I have felt little personal or emotional attachment to either place.

This project challenged those beliefs.

I felt pride reading about Macon's history. I knew the locations of various historic places; I had seen many of them for myself. I had always heard about the Cannonball House, but never knew it was named because a cannonball had broken through wall and landed inside during the Civil War. I was able to walk through a cemetery I had driven by literally hundreds of times in my life.

I spent hours at Taste and See, a local coffee shop, planning the 2019 edition of the Fall Line Review with other MGA students last year, but I had never known what Poplar Street looked like in the 1800s. It shouldn't really matter, but it left an impression on me. Seeing a picture of a street where I have spent so much time made me realize that others have enjoyed Poplar Street just as much as I have. It makes me appreciate the street (and the city) more.

As I was reading about the Jewish occupants of the cemetery, I noticed many had immigrated from eastern Europe or Russia. If they considered Macon good enough to build their lives here, then maybe it can be more to me than a place where I’ve spent a lot of time.

Where will I go from here?
Moving forward, I believe I will continue editing Wikipedia articles. Fixing written mistakes is fun for me (assuming those mistakes are not my own; that's an entirely different story.) However, I do not believe I will continue to research and write significant portions of articles. My interest in research does not run so deep.

I do feel personally obligated to defend the effort Wikipedians put into maintaining the innumerable articles (with any luck, I'll only be a little obnoxious about it.) The website isn't perfect, but it is a beautiful part of the internet.

I appreciate the encouragement to “be bold.” One thing that kept me from writing early on in the class was a fear of making a mistake. But the mistakes I make are proof that I am trying. Eventually that lesson will sink in and I won't worry about making mistakes. I'm not there yet, but I am glad to know I'm a little further along than I was before this class. "Be bold" is a phrase I'll put in my pocket and carry around with me long after this class is over. For that, I am grateful.


 * "But the mistakes I make are proof that I am trying." AMEN! Way to go. I appreciate your contributions to make this a better project. Well done. —Grlucas (talk) 11:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 7: July 14, 2019 - Adding a gallery
I finally figured out how to include pictures in a gallery at the bottom of the article. At first, I tried to insert each picture in my sandbox using the visual editor by adding it as "media." However, none of my pictures were lining up the way I wanted. I checked the Mount Auburn Cemetery page to see the formatting for its gallery section, thinking that would help me out. It didn't. Finally, I scrolled down in the "insert" tab and, lo and behold!, there's a gallery button. After some fiddling with that, the formatting is exactly right. I might add a few more pictures to the gallery, but I haven't decided yet.


 * Great work! How many photos did you take? Are you going to put them on Wikimedia Commons? Well done. —Grlucas (talk) 11:39, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I took a lot of pictures, but only ten are decent. I think I will post them to Wikimedia Commons. They might be useful in the future. Thank you for the suggestion! --Sara Kathryn 03:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 7: July 13, 2019 - Roadblocks at the library
After my trip to the cemetery, I drove to the Washington Memorial Library to find old pictures and other resources. I was disappointed on several fronts.

Roadblock one: no pictures
I was not allowed to use my phone to take a picture of any old photos because that's against the rules. Even if I could, many pictures belonged to specific collections and were not in the public domain. I was given the contact information of someone else at the library who will be able to tell me specifically which pictures (if any) would be fair game. There's a little hope I might be able to use an old picture yet.

Roadblock two: little information
The librarian was only able to locate one book on the cemetery's history (excluding the books I've already borrowed.) He, too, was surprised that there wasn't more information about the cemetery. The new book mentions the history of the cemetery in passing, but includes how the cemetery relates to the garden cemetery movement. I'll use as much of that as I can because it would be relevant to the cemetery's layout. My goal has been to get the article out of the "stub" category by hitting 500 words, but I'm not sure that's possible. We shall see.


 * That is a shame about the photos. I remember running into the same problem when I was doing some Macon research. Still, it seems like what you've got is pretty substantial. Good work. —Grlucas (talk) 11:37, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 7: July 13, 2019 - Finally seeing Rose Hill Cemetery
On Tuesday afternoon, I was able to walk around Rose Hill Cemetery. I was surprised to see how many graves were there. I was also surprised to see how run down everything looked. Brick wall borders were falling down and some graves had some unsettling gaps below the covering slab. Although the cemetery is rundown, the atmosphere was serious and, in a strange way, commanded respect. The layout was appealing because the paths wind around the area and allow the wanderer to discover new sights around each corner. I would highly recommend anyone visit because it is still beautiful. After all the research, I believed the cemetery had been almost like a forest with footpaths. There were several giant trees, but most of the cemetery was out in the open. However, after looking at old photographs of the cemetery, the cemetery landscape has hardly changed at all. Age, grave crowding, the interstate, and the railroad affect the cemetery's appearance more than the missing trees.

While I was exploring the cemetery, I was able to speak with a woman who works for the city of Macon and for the cemetery. The only resource she could recommend for information on the cemetery is the Rose Hill Rambles book I've been using and a pamphlet of the cemetery.

Seeing the cemetery
This upcoming week, I plan on using Rose Hill Rambles as a guide during my field trip to the Rose Hill Cemetery. I want to get a feel for what the cemetery is actually like and also capture some pictures for the article. I want to take a picture of Simri Rose's grave because he designed the cemetery, but I am not sure if his grave is notable enough for the article. I will be adding it to my sandbox anyway. I do want to practice uploading pictures to Wikipedia.

Another week, another library
I also am planning to visit the Washington Memorial Library for further research. Apparently, there are some old photographs of the cemetery before vandalism, weather damage, and age made it what it is today. Not sure if this would be possible, but I would like to see if I can include one of the old photographs in the article. I plan to check with a librarian if I could take a picture with my phone (without the flash, of course). If it's before 1900, the picture should be in the public domain. I will be reviewing the Wikipedia policy on how to properly cite that kind of picture.


 * Enjoy Rose Hill, and be sure to bring your camera. It's a great place. Keep diligent; you might be surprised at what you find. —Grlucas (talk) 15:40, 8 July 2019 (UTC)


 * It is cool that you planned to do these field trips to get more details and information of the articles you are writing about. I did the same thing, I visited High Falls State Park and it really help me know more about the park. Ysabella Escalona (talk) 05:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Glad to see your progressing with your research! This semester has flew by, quicker than expected. I'm pretty sure the librarian wouldn't mind you taking pictures. Tionnetakala (talk) 04:19, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 6: July 7, 2019 - Adding sand to the sandbox
This week has probably been my most productive week (at least as far as the article is concerned). I visited the library, snagged some good sources, and started getting down some notes. My sandbox had a meager 34 words last week; it's sitting at 200 right now. It doesn't feel like much, but it is progress. Quality over quantity, right? Also, close paraphrasing isn't a concern anymore. If I think I'm getting too close to someone else's phrasing, I can reread my sources to check or I can step away for a few hours and summarize the idea later. It's a pretty easy fix, really.


 * I agree that quality is much more important than quantity. Also, your emphasis on avoiding plagiarism is appreciated. I have found that sometimes it is a good idea to wait until the next day to work on a particular part of the article that I am having trouble with.—TSchiroMGA (talk) 03:42, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * This all sounds great. Keep up the good work! —Grlucas (talk) 15:44, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 6: July 3, 2019 - A successful trip to the library
I found several books on the Rose Hill Cemetery yesterday at the Charles A. Lanford library. I visited that library specifically because I knew they had a copy of the Rose Hill Rambles, which includes a walkthrough of seven paths through the cemetery along with the history of those interred. The first two pages have everything I need for my article, but I still brought home three other books that I plan to reference. (I also remembered why I let my library membership lapse: I walked out with four books on the cemetery, five fiction books, and two audiobooks; I would have taken home more, but I had all I could carry.)

Upon further research, I discovered that the Rose Hill Rambles costs around $99.95 on Amazon. A brand new library card cost me $2. Totally worth the trip and effort.


 * As I clicked to comment on your post I realized the way you cited Amazon and it looks much better than the way I am citing my sources, I am going to go ahead and change my citations for my article and do it like this. On the other hand, it was a good idea to get good and reliable information for your article from the library, sometimes the internet does not have all the information we need. Ysabella Escalona (talk) 20:00, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear your progressing! I worked at a historical society back home last year which has tons of books referring to Taliaferro County Courthouse. I work almost everyday, So I never have time to go home. Hopefully, I can get a day off next week to travel and collect those scholarly sources that I need.Tionnetakala (talk) 20:13, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 5: June 30, 2019 - Tip for coding
One of my favorite things I have learned about writing on Wikipedia is this: when the visual editor doesn't have the button I need, I can check out the source editing on some other article/journal entry and copy the code. For the first few weeks in this class, it was difficult to remember how to ping different people because I wanted to write @their_user_name. But if I went to that person's journal page, I could cut the coding from Dr. Lucas' response and paste it to my journal. I don't have to use that method as much now, but I did have to do something similar yesterday with a weird citation that I couldn't figure out in visual editing. A user removed a section of the Rose Hill Cemetery article because it didn't have a source; I had to cut and paste the original section and then add in the source with the correct coding. It was a pain, but that was the easiest workaround I could find.
 * I also found that switching editors can be pretty helpful when I want to just copy and paste a code instead of searching for it. In cases where I can't always find the code I want, I have a digital sticky note on my computer with the codes that I most commonly need. I have found that to be super helpful. Also, I'm wondering why the user didn't mark the section with a 'citation needed' instead of deleting the information. That definitely would have made things easier for you. It's a good thing we can see an article's history so you didn't have to rewrite.— Sabub (talk) 01:56, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The sticky note is a great suggestion! It sounds much easier than what I've been doing. Yeah, I'm holding my breath about adding the info back in with a source. The user removed it and the explanation was literally just "source." In hindsight, I probably should have posted to the article's talk page and tagged the user with an explanation of my addition. That also feels like overkill. At this point, I'm hoping what I've added is enough. I think it's enough. If it isn't, I'll find out eventually! --Sara Kathryn 02:24, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 5: June 29, 2019 - Reflections on writing about a cemetery
I apologize for the following wall of words. I just really want to share this experience. If there is a better way to format this entry so that it is easier to read, please let me know (and please explain how to code it).

Although this is obvious to some, I did not fully consider the implications of editing an article on a cemetery. While researching information about the Rose Hill Cemetery in the "Jewish Burials of Macon, Georgia" (thank you for the recommendation,!), I read through a few pages of people interred in the cemetery. It was a sobering experience. Many of the occupants of the Hebrew Burial Ground are children and young women. Children that survived infancy could die just as easily as a newborn. Amelia Dessau died from dysentery and (somehow) teething. She was one year old.

Many of the young women died either during childbirth or fairly soon after. Lena Sack died when she was twenty-one, five months after giving birth to her son Meyer. He died at the age of eight. All that is left of each person's life is their name, date of birth and death, and a few lines on how much they will be missed. In many cases, their life stories go with them. The inscription on Lena's grave is one of the longer ones: "Here lies the beautiful woman, well known and praised by women in the gates. She died in the prime of her young womanhood, taken from us before half her days. She was the joy of our heart and thus we say, 'woe to us. What is this that has befallen us? What is this that has taken this talented worker from us?' She was the crown of her husband, the respected Mme. Leah Tsril daughter of Reb Israel Chalfa who went to her resting place on the 11th of Tishre in the year 5657*. May her soul be bound up in the bond of eternal life. Amen. From childhood a devoted believer in God, in whose care she is now sweetly sleeping." That's it. That's all there is by which to remember Lena.

I am thankful I had the opportunity read about Amelia, Lena, and Meyer. May their souls be bound up in the bond of eternal life.

* In secular years, she died September 19,1896.


 * Great stuff. I'm glad you're enjoying your research. —Grlucas (talk) 12:01, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 5: June 29, 2019 - Drafting new material for article
Last week, I mentioned that revising a preexisting article is intimidating. Right now, I am concerned that my work is a close paraphrase of my research. I am trying to restructure my information by simplifying a large paragraph and combining the idea with a related idea from another part of the article I'm using. It just feels weird. I'm keeping everything in my sandbox because I'm not sure if it's okay or accidental close paraphrasing. I know anything that plagiarism of any kind (including close paraphrasing) can be deleted from my sandbox, but I do want there to be proof I worked on my article. The sentences themselves are also clunky, which is a bit frustrating.

Original: "Another spot could scarcely be found in any section of our country so much diversified, and comprising so many distinct objects and combinations going to form a perfect picture of rural beauty."

New: Rose chose the location because he believed it represented the local flora and fauna.

Original: "Unfortunately, over time, the site lost considerable vegetation because of the demand for additional burial space. A devastating tornado in 1954 also claimed large num-bers of mature trees that were never replaced. As a result, Rose Hill has undergone a 'physical metamor-phosis from a romantic forest to a necropolis, a trans-formation surely unforeseen by Simri Rose.'"

New: The cemetery's appearance has changed since Rose's plans due to overcrowding and a tornado in 1954 that uprooted many trees.

The part that worries me with this one is the section about the tornado. It sounds too similar to the original. Any thoughts or suggestions?
 * I actually thought that your new wording about the tornado was a good summary of the first sentence. Perhaps if you break it up into two sentences, it will be easier to expand on the idea.LynzeeWhite (talk) 19:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Expanding it would definitely help! I'll work on that once my other sources come in. Thank you!--Sara Kathryn 01:25, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think your paraphrases are much clearer and more appropriate for Wikipedia. Don't be afraid to edit. Remember, be bold! I think you're doing what you need to do, and the only way you will gain confidence is by getting in there and editing. Go for it! —Grlucas (talk) 11:59, 1 July 2019 (UTC)


 * how are you adding the numbers at the end to reference back to your citation? Also, I keep thinking im paraphrasing too, which is difficult to overcome.Tionnetakala (talk) 00:19, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * In the visual editor, there's a button at the top of the toolbar that says "Cite." If you click that button, you can select what kind of source you're referencing and fill out the information. One benefit of using the visual editor is that you can plop the URL, DOI, ISBN, etc. and Wikipedia will automatically fill out the rest and format everything for you. Sometimes that doesn't work. I ran into that situation yesterday. In that case, the source editor has a "Cite" tab in the toolbar. There's a dropdown menu that says "templates" and you can choose what kind of source you're using from there. The numbers should show up automatically either way. Hope this helps!--Sara Kathryn 01:25, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 4: June 23, 2019 - Checking for broken links
I appreciate the opportunity to check for broken links within Wikipedia articles. In the past, I only checked a Wikipedia reference page if I wanted to use one of their sources in a paper. I never considered checking the links to verify the information because I trusted the Wikipedia system would correct any mistake. Now that I'm critiquing articles, I want to see if the links are accurate. It can be fun to find and correct small mistakes. It is also an ethical action. Carroll discusses this in chapter 6 and references Rebecca Blood's second rule from The Weblog Handbook: "Online readers 'deserve, as much as possible, all of the facts.'" If a Wikipedia user can check a contributor's facts, it allows him to come to his own conclusions. If an otherwise perfect link is broken, a reader might look other places for less accurate information. Although fixing broken links is enjoyable, it is good to know it serves a higher purpose.


 * I think that checking for broken links is very important for maintenance purposes. One issue I can see happening is that in the case of web links a URL could remain while its content could change. This would make it a logical error because the citation points to the content through the services of the URL. The URL itself does not actually determine what is written on that page. One suggestion that I might make for you is to consider breaking up this entry with two sections. You may want to consider your first section being labeled "Introduction" and the second section labeled "Ethical Issues". If you did this then you would need to revise the order of some of your sentences in this entry so that they would fit their requisite subheadings better.—TSchiroMGA (talk) 11:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I never really used Wikipedia before this class but I appreciate it now. There is a lot of work that goes into maintaining and creating the article. It's so good that users check for functioning links because if not the information can't be validated. If the information is not valid then users are not getting the facts.Kehli.west (talk) 19:58, 29 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm glad that you decided to write about checking for broken links because I meant to review the links when I was reviewing my article and forgot to do so. When I checked the links in my article many of them relating to the history of the historical site no longer existed or would not load properly. — Ajhawkins95 (talk)

Journal Week 4: June 23, 2019 - Copy editing
I returned to the Home School Legal Defense Association article because, bless its heart, the page could use some help. I am familiar with the organization and, though my worldview is quite different now, I understand what they're trying to say. I tried to read the official decision and find the year(s) that the HSLDA represented Mr. and Mrs. F in Michigan against the Camdenton R-III School District, but I do not trust myself enough to decipher legalese. I know the verdict was drafted in 2002, but I could not suss out anything else. I did rephrase the first sentence in the summary so that it wasn't a direct quote, but it took a while for me to work up the nerve. Editing something in a large article is intimidating. I posted on the "talk" page about the change in case anyone wanted to know why I changed it.

Original quote: "The [HSLDA] is a 'United States-based nonprofit advocacy organization established to defend and advance the constitutional right of parents to direct the education of their children and to protect family freedoms.'"

New version: "The [HSLDA] is a United States-based organization that seeks to aid homeschooling families through legal representation."

Any thoughts on the new version? It's probably generic, but I wanted to keep it simple.
 * I like it. I usually think whenever you can use your won words, you should. —Grlucas (talk) 12:03, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I was intimidated by making an edit in the article of my choosing as well. I've been spending time organizing ideas out on my paper and in my sandbox. The article I picked lacks a ton of information. The length of the article was around 3-4 sentences; however, I went in and added content like architect and history.Tionnetakala (talk) 06:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 4: June 22, 2019 - Adding to the Rose Hill Cemetery
I have found several resources for my article and will be pursuing another this week. After doing some research this week, I found the book Grave Landscapes: The Nineteenth-Century Rural Cemetery Movement. It was published by the University of South Carolina and includes detailed information about various historical cemeteries, including Rose Hill Cemetery. I plan on calling the office for RHC to see if they have any historical documents (like newspaper articles) on the cemetery. The "history" section of their website is an interesting read but I will not be using it in my article because, among other reasons, they do not list any citations. I also found a book titled Rose Hill Rambles in Rose Hill Cemetery. It's a book located at the Charles A. Lanford Library that was written on behalf of the Middle Georgia Historical Society. It sounds promising. While I was editing the RHC page, I corrected some mild typos and was able to add that the designer of the cemetery was a horticulturist. I also discovered one of the links to the national registry does not work, which was oddly exciting.
 * You have made great progress! Your search for reliable sources and documents are headed in the right direction. We should all further our search by getting in contact with our local facilities to see what they have to offer that a search on the internet would not be able to provide us with. Atallent (talk) 06:01, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I second this! It seems like you are getting really far in your research. You are doing a great job utilizing not only online resources but physical ones as well. Also, nice job practicing citations. I wish you the best of luck as you continue your research!— Sabub (talk) 19:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * and Thank you both for the kind words! I will feel better once I've touched bases with the RHC; I hate talking on the phone. The end result will be worth the effort, whether I use any information from them or not. I look forward to seeing the improvements you both make on your articles! Noah's Ark Animal Rescue and the International Cherry Blossom Festival are both worthy causes! --Sara Kathryn 04:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep up the good work! You're doing exactly what you should be. —Grlucas (talk) 12:02, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Glad to see your progressing well! Hopefully, i'll be catching up soon. I'm waiting on responses for my research also. Tionnetakala (talk) 06:13, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 3: June 16, 2019 - Topic of Choice
I might be taking some liberties with the "topic of choice" prompt, but I would like to take this time to write about my kittens. I am not a cat person. I am certainly not a cat lady. I am, however, the caretaker of two orphaned kittens that I found in my yard. Right now, they are typical kittens: playful, snuggly, and curious. Tatiana (my sister chose that name) is a healthy calico. She is considered a dilute calico because her coloring is more muted than the traditional orange, black, and white calico. Gracie is a grey tabby with white paws, though it took me several weeks to realize she is a tabby cat because her striped pattern is so faint. She seems to enjoy screaming when she is displeased. Gracie also seems to be the runt of her litter as she is significantly smaller than Tati. Tati and Gracie's eyes are transitioning from being bright blue to a muted gray. After taking care of them for three weeks, I still do not consider myself to be a cat person. I do enjoy having them around and I plan on keeping them and having them spayed. --Sara Kathryn 00:26, 17 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)
 * I'm glad you're practicing linking. What is the proper way to link to Wikipedia articles? What should these posts be about? Also, please listen to my feedback for week 3. —Grlucas (talk) 20:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * My goal with this entry was to practice linking to different Wikipedia articles and get a better handle on the source editing side of Wikipedia while writing about something I like, but I see now I should have been writing more about a class-related topic. I will do better next time! After listening to your feedback, I'm now realizing I linked to a Wikipedia article as though it had been an outside source. I have adjusted the citation accordingly. --Sara Kathryn 02:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)
 * 👍🏼 (I fixed your reply indentation for you.) —Grlucas (talk) 11:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --Sara Kathryn 02:32, 23 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)
 * How are you linking to wiki? I' having issues with doing so.
 * ^^^Replying to the above comment: I highlight the text that is related to a link I want to use. Then I'll click the chain icon in the toolbar at the top of the page. Sometimes I'll type in the name of the Wiki article I want to use, but you can also go to the Wiki page you'll be linking to and copy and paste that domain into the link box that pops up. It should automatically link after that. That's my process. I hope my explanation helped! --Sara Kathryn 02:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)

I think my parents have a book on the Jewish section of Rose Hill Cemetery that you may be able to use for your article. Most of my dad's family is buried there so I've been there plenty of times and know a bit about the area.


 * Thank you so much for the suggestion! Is it "Jewish Burials of Macon, GA" by Marian Waxelbaum Kaufman & Gus Bernd Kaufman? If it is, I've found a digital copy of it that I'll be looking through. If it's a different book, I'd love to check it out. --Sara Kathryn 02:32, 23 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)

That's it. I'm glad you were able to find it. Most folks outside the Jewish community here in Macon don't even know about it. I just know that it was published in 1997 so it may not have any recent information. Let me know if you need help understanding parts of it. Jkoplin1

Journal Week 3: June 15, 2019 - Choosing a Topic
Originally, I wrote this journal entry about editing knitting-related Wikipedia articles. However, after reviewing the requirements for the assignment, I'll be changing directions and focusing on Macon-related articles. My first option is the Macon Bacon article, which is especially sparse. Because the team seems to be growing in popularity, it might be useful to have a more detailed Wiki article. My second option is the Rose Hill Cemetery article. It has a higher importance than the Macon Bacon article and would be a little easier to find historical, verifiable information. A good deep-dive into Galileo would probably bring up some interesting information. --Sara Kathryn 00:26, 17 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)


 * I also think that the Rose Hill Cemetery article is potentially a good choice. I wonder if you can find information about who designed the site and the steps it took to construct it? Adding in hard-to-find details would be a great asset for public knowledge.TSchiroMGA (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * That's a great idea! I will definitely look into the construction aspect more. Best of luck with writing about Amerson River Park! --Sara Kathryn 02:48, 20 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)

Journal Week 2: June 9, 2019 (Part 2)
I was hoping that Wikipedia would have visual walkthroughs for the website's different features. I'm so thankful walkthroughs are not only available but also assigned to us (I honestly would not know where to begin otherwise!) I also had no idea that Wikipedia gave quality ratings to their articles. They deserve a lot of credit for taking that much interest in providing accurate information. Additionally, it's nice that Wikipedia assumes that people are genuinely trying to give accurate information. My impression is they believe plagiarism (from a close reading) shows a lack of skill instead of malicious intent, which is a frequent (and mostly true) assumption in an academic environment. It's a serious mistake which is important to avoid, but one that eventually will be caught and corrected on Wikipedia. --Sara Kathryn 9 June 2019 (UTC) (talk)

Journal Week 2: June 9, 2019 (Part 1)- Home School Legal Defense Association article review
The first sentence in the Wikipedia article on the Home School Legal Defense Association includes a long quote from the HSLDA's website instead rewording the general idea. There are several links to a page that does not exist. Michael Farris, one of the association's founders, has his own Wikipedia page; J. Michael Smith does not. His name is mentioned twice under the overview box on the right side of the page. Several citations are missing in the second paragraph under the History subheading. The subheading on Other HSLDA Programs includes a portion on HSLDA Compassion. The only explanatory sentence is mostly a quote from the website instead of rewording the ideas. It does not explain what kind of assistance the needy families receive. Although there are some unnecessary quotes, the article's language is impartial. The fourth and final paragraph under the History subheading mentions criticism regarding the HSLDA, including that homeschooling families and non-homeschooling families have disagreed with the association's political connections. Under the Significant Court Cases subheading, the second paragraph does not mention the year when the HSLDA represented a family in a certain court case. Because of this, the sentence has a [when] tag. --Sara Kathryn 9 June 2019 (UTC)

On the whole, I enjoyed this exercise more than I thought I would! I'll definitely be evaluating articles like this in the future (and not just for this class.)
 * You did a very good job of evaluating the article you chose. You caught many things that need to be fixed, added, or removed. It is great to hear that you enjoyed the exercise! We should all look more closely into the sources we pull our information from and I think this exercise will help guide us in finding the quality sources that we need for our future works. Atallent (talk) 00:09, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Good practice using a reference; however, Wikipedia articles should be linked in the body of your text. Instead of writing "this article," you should name and link it. Try to summarize your main points at the beginning — called the inverted pyramid — to make your text a bit more screen-friendly. Finally, please sign your posts. 😁 —Grlucas (talk) 15:44, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 1: June 1, 2019
Right now, writing and editing a page on Wikipedia sounds like a fun challenge. I appreciate that a writer cannot give personal opinions or draw conclusions on a Wikipedia article. I am ready for a break from writing opinionated essays. Writing about others' research sounds appealing. One article I found to be particularly interesting is "Writing Today." Writing an essay for a digital audience is definitely different from writing a traditional academic essay, but the article mentions different points I had never considered before. Academic writing is difficult to translate to digital media because the reader's attention span is not important in academic writing. When a writer publishes a piece on the internet, the success of their article rests on how many people view their work. If a person has more experience using many words to say something simple, he or she will naturally struggle to simplify their language. It is validating to know that it can be a difficult transition; it is to be expected. Right now, I know I am still in Capstone-mode. I must reach the arbitrary word-minimum! Unfortunately, my bloated sentences lack punch. I hope that this class will help me lose the weight of those extra words and become stronger! ~
 * All strong points. I often challenge students to write under a certain amount of words. This is more difficult than it seems. —Grlucas (talk) 13:51, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Journal Week 1: May 31, 2019
Hello! My name is Sara Kathryn, though I also go by SK. After completing my Capstone class last semester (my topic was family dysfunction in Pride and Prejudice), I will begin the new year with a degree in English. My plans after graduation are to be determined. This is my first time contributing to anything on Wikipedia and the process to even make this page has been more involved than I anticipated. It's satisfying to know that, although anyone can edit Wikipedia and add incorrect information, there are serious people patrolling the website who work to make every page as accurate as possible. ~
 * Hi SK! I agree that this is very overwhelming, but I do feel like I will learn a lot this semester! I've always tried to steer clear from Wikipedia, but I am learning a lot about it that I never knew before. I wish you a great semester!LynzeeWhite (talk) 19:53, 2 June 2019 (UTC)