User:GeorgeAlbert02833350/sandbox

Article Evaluation DUE 2/2/18

 * 1) Complete the "Evaluating Articles and Sources" training (linked below).
 * 2) Create a section in your sandbox titled "Article evaluation" where you'll leave notes about your observations and learning from the three articles.
 * 3) Choose an article on Wikipedia related to your course as assigned by the Instructor to read and evaluate. For this class, choose one from each of the following three groups for this assignment. As you read, consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):

−Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

−Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

−Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

−Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

−Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

−Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

−How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

−How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

'''Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes.'''

Article selections below with links:

CE Biographies William Milnor Roberts

William Milnor Roberts (July 14, 1881 in Soledad Brazil) Involved in the construction of Eads Bridge, was the chief engineer of Northern Pacific Railroad, and served as president of American Society of Civil Engineers for two decades. The article did include a few sentences that described Roberts as the most important engineer in his era, which is slightly biased and should be revised. There seems to be a lack of valid citations. The last two references in the section do not work. I feel as if the information presented is very minimal. The subsection works merely lists the works Roberts was a part rather than providing a background on each of those projects. The talk page has a few conversations going on, a few on the issue with the lack of the quality in the citations part of the article, and others on the lack of detail in Roberts career as an engineer. The Roberts wiki page is not part of any WikiProjects.

CE Topics American Society of Civil Engineers

American Society of Civil Engineers Founded in 1852 to represent the civil engineering profession worldwide. The society represents over 150,000 members throughout 177 countries. Primary task is the dissemination of technical and professional information to the civil engineering profession. Boasts 9 institutes to serve the working professionals within the civil engineering profession: Architectural Engineering Institute, Coasts, Oceans, Ports and Rivers Institute, Construction Institute, Engineering Mechanics Institute, Environmental and Water Resources Institute, Geo-Institute, Transportation and Development Institute, Structural Engineering Institute, and Utility Engineering & Surveying Institute. This Wiki page is part of three ongoing WikiProjects (WikiProjects United States, WikiProject Civil Engineering, WikiProject Organization). The page has plenty references that work. The project is very informative and unbiased. The project shows balance by not only including prominent male engineers but also includes a big list of influential female engineers. This article definitely provides more in depth facts about than the lectures in class. The project shows an overview of prominent engineers who played a part in the foundations of ASCE, the outstanding projects that ASCE boasts, and also provides information on disputes within the Society. By showing both sides of the story of the disputes project shows balance.

CE Subjects Time value of money

Time Value of Money. Money loses value with time. Interest is paid or earned to make up for the time value of money. The project is a part of four WikiProjects (WikiProject Business, WikiProject Economics, WikiProject Finance, WikiProject Time). The papge was created as a result of an education assignment that concluded May 15, 2018. Their are a few sentences that are included in the first section that are a bit distracting or slightly irrelevant. Overall listing of formulas for economic calculations are listed neatly. The talk page has had a pretty active interactions. Conversations range from suggestions to change language tone to considering time value of money as a concept rather than a noun phrase. The project does include very technical language that I presume only those who have a good foundation in finance would understand. For being such a common concept in finance I feel there should be more technical references listed.

Content Gap DUE 2/09/18
-Wikipedians often talk about "content gaps." What do you think a content gap is, and what are some possible ways to identify them? Look at this link(WikiProject Academic Journals/Journals cited by Wikipedia/E15). Look at the entry for The Engineering Economist. Does this meet the criteria for a "content gap"... is the material relevant?.. how many articles refer to this page?. Two citation and two articles refer to the page. This definitely is a content gap, it seems like the Wikipedia page was created as additional information for another Wiki page and was not completed.

-What are some reasons a content gap might arise? What are some ways to remedy them?
 * I believe content gaps can arise from the lack of time management skills. Perhaps some of these pages could have been completed if the user allowed themselves enough time to distribute his/her deliverables.

-Does it matter who writes Wikipedia? Should only Civil engineers write Wiki articles?... What does our specialized training offer the reading public that uses Wikipedia?...
 * No, anybody can write and is encouraged too. As long as the author is adding value in conformance to the consensus of other wikipedians and with credible references there should be no issue. Our special training can allow the public to find credible references to an array of topics in a matter of seconds.

-What does it mean to be "unbiased" on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of "bias"? Assignment: Write a paragraph on your user page, outlining your recommendations for creating an article in Wiki on this journal.
 * To be unbiased one needs to be only presenting factual statements and include zero subjective ideas and language. My definition of bias is fairly close.

The criteria for writing an article on wiki is very straightforward. One must only state facts that originate from reputable sources. Copy and pasting information violates wiki policy. One must read comprehensively and restate that information in your own words. There is no room for bias when writing articles for wiki and if an author has a conflict of interest with the subject of the article, that author must stay away from writing that particular piece. When writing articles one should not reference articles with content gaps because they lack the validity that one needs when writing an article. One must write with a neutral point of view at all times. Interacting with other wiki users is also very encouraged to come to a consensus about the topic one wants to write about.

Add to an Article DUE 2/16/18
Read Gerald W. Smith and the William Milnor Roberts articles. Consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):

-Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * 1) The Smith article had a few sentences that are sort of like fun facts that I believe should be left out because they're distracting.

-Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * 1) The article is describing the life of an individual and it does not make any bold or subject claims about himself.

-Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * 1) Again I find no viewpoints in a factual description of an individuals life.

-Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? -Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? -Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? No
 * The links provided are only the obituary documentation of the funeral of Smith.
 * Two references from the Roberts article do not work.

-Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The Roberts article is involved with four Wikiprojects (WikiProject Pennsylvannia, WikiProject Philidelphia, WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Trains). The Smith article has no Wiki projects. -How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The Roberts article seems like it needs more inline citations and better format of the work done so far. -How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? -Familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding a citation to either the Smith or Roberts articles. There are two ways the student may choose to do this and the student must choose one method:
 * In class was a brief lecture on each of these individuals. We are expected to be up to date with assignments delivered.

1) Choose at least one citation relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your recommended citation and edit material on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes. **Refer to Gerald W. Smith talk page to see recommendations made.**

2) Add 1-2 sentences to the same article, and cite that statement to a reliable source, as you learned in the online training and documented on the talk page. Document the edit with a reference to the talk page.

First Draft on Improving an Engineering Article DUE 3/09/18
You've picked a topic from the list above and found your sources. Now it's time to start developing your article as a concept and from there into a finished product... much like the process of developing an engineering design ...

Creating a new section of an article?

What is the lead section?
 * Write an outline of that topic in the form of a standard Wikipedia article's "lead section." Write it in your sandbox.
 * A "lead" section is not a traditional introduction. It should summarize, very briefly, what the rest of the article will say in detail. The first paragraph should include important, broad facts about the subject.

The lead section is the first section of a Wikipedia article. A good lead will summarize the entire article, providing context, and briefly covering all important aspects of the topic. For a biography article, the first sentence should include the name of the person in bold, followed by birth date and date of death in parentheses, and a brief description of the person’s notability.

William Milnor Roberts (February 12, 1810 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania – July 14, 1881 in Soledad, Brazil) was an American civil engineer. Roberts worked on various infrastructure projects all across the nation and even across parts of South America. His experience in the profession landed him a position as president of the American Society of Civil Engineers two decades after its founding. Most of Robert's projects involved railroads, canals and bridges.

See Editing Wikipedia page 9 for more information on wiki-style editing dos and don'ts.
 * Read these two articles ... first, Henry Roe Campbell and then, Arthur Mellen Wellington ...

Improving an existing article?

- In comparison with the Campbell article Wellington's article is missing short descriptions of the projects Wellington took part of. Wellington's article also does not talk at all about his contributions to engineering economics it merely just mentions his pioneering position.
 * Identify what's missing from the current form of the Wellington article.

- In my opinion the lead article is straight to the point and does reflect the importance of Wellington's pioneering efforts of Engineering Economy.
 * Given the class discussion about Wellington's role in developing the concept of engineering economy, does this article reflect Wellington's importance?... does it meet the standard for a lead article?...

-After reading Engineering Economics there is no mention of Wellington throughout the whole article. I checked the references as well and there is no connection from the integration of economics to engineering.
 * Read the topic materials in Wikipedia listed above from Week 2. Pick a relevant article on EngEcon that in your opinion should reflect Wellington's contributions.
 * Does it?... What would you recommend changing?...
 * Make notes for improvement on your user page ... Separately analyze and discuss Wellington and your subject article from Week 2. What would you improve? .. any concepts or draft material?

Teamwork exercise: -The scope of the assignment is as follows: Keep reading your sources, too, as you prepare to write the body of a civil engineering article.
 * Develop an informal team project.
 * 1) Setup a new section (one and only one) on the Wellington Talk page.
 * 2) Each class member will add a paragraph using the ":" to start and sign with "GeorgeAlbert02833350 (talk) 04:18, 26 February 2018 (UTC)" addressing the question. Build on other comments or offer new lines of thought ... be creative but must have the engineering focus.

Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9

Thinking about Wikipedia DUE 3/09/18
What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"? NPV or "No original research" NOR
 * What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information? Particularly for civil engineering data, information or knowledge given NPV or NOR.
 * On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?
 * For this question, assume we are not engineers,
 * If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?
 * Now we are answering this as aspiring Civil Engineers. We must also face the question of technology and the role it played in the development of civil infrastructure.
 * If Wikipedia and civil engineering topics were being written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? How would Wellington have written about railroad economy? How would Campbell? John Haydon? Milnor Roberts? What about 100 years from now? What would CE knowledge look like 100 years from now? Would a wiki platform remain relevant?

Make a new section on your user page


 * One subheading to answer the first question ...
 * Second subheading to answer the second question ...
 * Organize the response in each section any way you wish ...
 * The audience for the first question is a general reader with some exposure to technology while the audience for the second question is practicing civil engineers with fifteen years of experience.

Thinking about sources and plagiarism -Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why? -What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company? -What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism? -What is public domain mean? ... -What does fair use mean?... -What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism? -Copying text from other sources?
 * Blog posts are riddled with opinionated arguments
 * Because you risk of violating copyright
 * Copyright violation is using somebody else's work without their permission, while plagiarism is claiming another authors work as yours.
 * Means that exclusive intellectual properties have been expired. No one can claim ownership of anything in Wiki.
 * Certain exceptions to the copy right rules.
 * To avoid plagiarism give yourself ample time to finish assignments independently. Also comprehending what one is writing about allows the editor to reiterate in your own words.