User:Missionedit/Adoption/Marcus1093

A few questions to start off this adoption:

1) Would you prefer to be called Marcus1093, Marcus, or something else? 2) What is your goal in contributing to Wikipedia? 3) What time zone do you live in? 4) What do you expect to get out of this mentorship? 5) What picture would you like on this page to represent you? It can be a picture of anything, and it doesn't have to be one that you've uploaded yourself. For some examples, see User:Missionedit/Adoption/Molly's Mind or User:Missionedit/Adoption/Hisashiyarouin. ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 23:38, 7 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for adopting me. To start off, here are the answers:
 * 1) Just call me Marcus
 * 2) My goal is to contribute to to Wikipedia so to provide quality information to readers. At the same time, I am also trying to improve my command of english through copyediting.
 * 3) Singapore time (+8)
 * 4) I hope to learn more about Wikipedia editing and to be a better copyeditor. I also hope to explore more ways to contribute to Wikipedia.
 * 5) [] (I'm not sure if this is the right way to post links of photos.)
 * Thanks once again and looking forward to our journey of adoption!
 * Marcus1093 (talk) 02:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Great, Marcus :) You can call me Stasia. First lesson coming up! ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 02:49, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Lesson 1: Wikiquette
"Wikiquette" is a portmanteau of "Wikipedia" and "etiquette". It is something that you may already be familiar with, depending how much reading around the different wikipedia pages you've made.

Assuming good faith
Always assume that every member of the community you come across is trying to do the right thing. The exception to this would be somebody who already has four plus vandalism warnings and who is making more malicious edits; they probably aren't acting in good faith. Apart from that, don't jump straight in to assume somebody is malicious.

Threading
Threading is an organized way of replying to comments by adding an additional indentation, represented by a colon, :. When you're responding to something I write, you use one colon. When I then respond to you, you use two colons. When you then respond to me, you use three colons. When you want to respond to the original post, then you just go back to using one colon. Think of it this way: whatever you want to respond to, preface it with one more colon than what it had already. Talk pages should something like this - Have a read of WP:THREAD to see how this works.

Avoiding common mistakes
Avoid these mistakes which have been made by many an editor:
 * Don't create autobiographical articles or articles about someone close to you, company articles, dictionary-type articles (we have Wiktionary for that), or redundant articles. For the last one, it's easy to figure out if you're creating something redundant; just type in the search term into the search box and see if what comes up covers your topic.
 * Whenever you delete content, be sure you give an explanation as to why. Even if you revert vandalism, say that it's vandalism. Also, try not to delete valuable content just because it's poorly written and biased; instead, just rewrite it.
 * Don't self-reference (referencing the Wikipedia project in article space)
 * Don't use external links in places other than the external link section in an article
 * Don't add your signature ( ~ ) any place but a talk page, but always remember to use your signature on talk pages.
 * Edit instead of criticize and be bold!
 * Remain level-headed in arguments (if you feel you're getting too heated, walk away and bring in a third party)
 * Don't get annoyed when you see bad articles or drastic edits (or even deletion) of your work. :)

Signatures
There are also Wikiquette rules for signatures. Some people like to customize their signature using CSS and other code. There are a few no-nos, though.
 * Do not copy another editor's signature. Even making it look somewhat like another editor's signature is wrong. Linking to someone else's user page on your signature is also a big mistake.
 * Don't make your signature too big. This can effect the way the surrounding text is displayed. Be sparing with your superscript and subscript, too. It can sometimes cause a similar problem. Don't make your signature too small, either, then we won't know who you are :) When you use different colors, make sure that color-blind people will still be able to read it without a problem.
 * Do not include images in your signature. It's wrong for a number of reasons, including server slowdown, distraction, comment displacement, and cluttering up the "File links" section every time you comment. You can use webdings or wingdings to get an image effect if you really want, because these are technically fonts and not images.
 * Keep your signatures short enough that they don't take up a whole line of text when you comment.
 * Make sure that your signature always links to at least your user page, talk page, and/or contributions page.
 * Don't include any external links at all or internal links that have no purpose to building the encyclopedia.
 * Assume good faith when approaching someone who has these problem signatures and be polite.

End of lesson 1
Questions? ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 02:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No problem and ready to proceed! ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 09:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Lesson 2: The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
These are the five "pillars", or fundamental principles, of Wikipedia. I've reworded them a little from the original to further explain/simplify.
 * BluePillar.svg Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
 * Wikipedia incorporates various elements of reference materials such as encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers. Wikipedia is not for advertising, propaganda, or social networking. It is also not a dictionary, newspaper, or collection of source documents; there are sister projects for this. The goal of Wikipedia is to form a comprehensive online encyclopedia.


 * GreenPillar.svg Wikipedia is written from a neutral point of view.
 * Wikipedia strives for articles that document and explain the major points of view, giving due weight with respect to their prominence in an impartial tone. We present no such opinion as being "the truth" or "the right position" (in theory). Every allegation must be backed up by references, especially when concerning a controversial topic or a living person. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong here.


 * YellowPillar.svg Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute.
 * Wikipedia is free for others to edit, use, modify, and distribute. No editor owns an article, so everything you write is free to be mercilessly edited and redistributed at will. Respect copyright laws, and never plagiarize from sources.


 * OrangePillar.svg Editors should treat each other with respect and civility.
 * Wikipedia has millions of editors who are bound to disagree on some topics. If a conflict arises, you should discuss your disagreement on the nearest talk page and remain level-headed without accusing. Just because another editor may be attacking you does not mean that you should to engage in similar behavior.


 * RedPillar.svg Wikipedia has no firm rules.
 * Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but their content and interpretation can evolve over time. Their principles and spirit matter more than their literal wording, and nothing is carved in stone. Sometimes improving Wikipedia means making an exception to the rule. Be bold in your edits (but not reckless) and don't worry about making a mistake, as you can always fix it.

End of lesson 2
Any questions? Next we'll do a lesson on reliable sources; a very important aspect of Wikipedia. Also, feel free to ask questions about Wikipedia unrelated to our lessons :) ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 21:01, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No :) ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 05:20, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Lesson 3: Reliable sources
For more information on this topic see Reliable sources. There will be test after this lesson just to make sure you understand it. The test shouldn't be too hard for you. If any specific questions do come up, we can do a lesson on it.

On Wikipedia, the word "source" can mean three different, interchangeable things: either a piece of work, the writer of the work, or the creator of the work. Therefore, a reliable source is a published material from a reliable publisher (such as a university), or an author who is known for the subject that they are covering, such as L. David Mech, a wolf expert, speaking about wolves, or a fiction author being interviewed about their own work. Or it could be a combination, like a book about wolves by L. David Mech published by the University of Chicago Press. And while a source may be considered reliable on one topic, it may not be on so with other topics. For instance, the book Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation by L. David Mech only talks about real wolves. While would be considered a reliable source when talking about wolf behaviors and conservation, it may not be the best authority for talking about Little Red Riding Hood :)

Self-published sources are considered unreliable because false information could be published this way. However, this rule doesn't apply to self-published sources talking about themselves. Let's say that Orson Scott Card wrote a post on his website about his inspiration for the Ender's Game series. Because it's coming straight from the horse's mouth, you could add that information in the section called "Creation and inspiration".

Mainstream news sources are generally considered reliable, like The New York Times. However, some of these news sources get information from Wikipedia, so it can get trapped in cyclic sourcing. Wikipedia cites an article that cites Wikipedia! Never cite a Wikipedia article in another mainspace Wikipedia article. Other sites that have an "anyone can edit" policy like Wikipedia are not considered reliable sources.

In addition, anything that is common knowledge (eg. the sky is blue) does not need to be sourced, just like in a reference paper. Saying that snow melts when it gets warm outside is not going to need a source.

End of lesson 3
Any questions before the test? Make sure you tell me if I'm giving you lessons that are too easy for you; I want to make sure you actually learn and not just go along with the flow :) I see that you have a good grasp of how to use citations already, so we can move on to copyediting after this if you like. Or we can go over citations, just to give you a refresher with a couple new things added in. ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * No :) Sorry for the late reply... been busy with school lately. ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 12:47, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * That's totally fine :) So would you like to do a lesson on citations or copyediting next? ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 23:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Copyediting please :) ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 02:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Test
1.) Q- A friend just told you that Mitt Romney has been appointed Chancellor of Harvard University. Should you add this to Romney and/or Harvard's pages? Why or why not?


 * A-

2.) Q- The New York Times has published a cartoon as part of an article which you think is blatantly racist. Can you use this cartoon on Wikipedia to support the fact that the New York Times is a racist newspaper? (assuming the cartoon is freely licensed with no copyright restrictions)


 * A-

3.) Q- You find an article claiming that socialists are more likely to get cancer than capitalists, but capitalists are more likely to get diabetes than socialists. Should you include this information on the socialist, capitalist, cancer, or diabetes pages?


 * A-

4.) Q- Would you consider Apple Inc. to be a reliable source for information on Microsoft? Why or why not?


 * A-

5.) Q- Would you consider Ben and Jerry's official Twitter page as a reliable source? Why or why not?


 * A-

6.) Q- An unnamed "forum official" from the Chicago Tribune community forums comments on the Chicago Tribune's stance on world hunger (on the forum). Is this considered a reliable source? Why or why not?


 * A-

7.) Q- Would you consider the "about us" section on Burger King's website to be a reliable source for information on the history of Burger King? Why or why not?


 * A-

. 8.) Q- Everybody knows that the sky is blue except for one editor, who says that it's bronze. Do you need a source to prove to him the sky is blue? Why or why not?


 * A-

9.) Q- Is Harrison Ford's IMDb profile considered a reliable source for his article on Wikipedia? Why or why not?


 * A-

End of test
Here's your test! It's about 2 or 3 months late, but I managed to remember it at least :) My apologies, and good luck! ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 14:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Lesson 4: Copy editing
Copy editing is a skill which you will likely have to use at one time or another on Wikipedia whether you are writing a new article or fixing an old one. I enjoy it, and as you also seem to like copyediting (which, by the way can be spelled as one word or two), I hope you will enjoy this lesson and your assignment. This lesson is mostly taken from the GOCE (Guild of Copy Editors) page.

Guild of Copy Editors
Since you are already part of the Guild of Copy Editors, I don't really have to explain this one to you. Wikiproject Guild of Copy Editors a collaborative effort that focuses on copy editing articles, as well as other minor cleanup jobs. To "copy edit" is to go through and check spelling, grammar, wikilinks, formatting, etc. Basically making an unreadable page readable :)

How to copy edit
The best way to copy edit is to fix all of the spelling, grammar, and basic formatting first. Then you look up the type of the article (eg. biography) in the Manual of Style to see if every heading is in the proper order. For example, if I was copy editing a novel, I would go to Manual of Style/Novels to see what order the headings were supposed to be in.

Organizing your copy editing strategy

 * 1) Start at the lead section and fix any errors you find.
 * 2) In the edit summary, put "Copyediting", "Copyedit", "CE", or something akin to that so that other editors know what you did. Unless you're only doing things that are obvious (e.g. putting periods at the end of sentences, capitalizing a person's name), don't mark the "minor edit" box.
 * 3) Move down to each of the following sections and do the same thing.
 * 4) Change the order of the headings to the order that the Manual of Style suggests, perhaps moving information to different sections as appropriate.
 * 5) When you have finished, remove any tags which refer to problem that you fixed. A "tag" is a notice at the top of the page that something is wrong with the article.

I've found this is the best way to efficiently and effectively copy edit, but if you have any other suggestions or methods that you are comfortable with, feel free to use those as well/instead.

Different kinds of English
Sometimes you'll see,  , or   in the lead when you edit. These templates are only visible when you edit; they are invisible to the public. There are other types of English templates such as Irish English or South African English, but first three are the ones you'll come across the most often. In articles containing, use mdy (23 May 2013) dates and British spelling. It's the same thing with, but with Australian spelling (obviously). When you come across, that means use dmy (May 23, 2015) dates and American spelling. If none of these or  or   is present in the article, I have found it is most widely accepted to use dmy dates and American spelling.

A quick reference for these different kinds of English is available at American and British English spelling differences.

End of lesson 4
The Guild of Copy Editors has a list of article copy edit requests. Assignment: Pick an article from the list that you are going to work on, tell me which one you picked, and I'll monitor your copy editing and tell you how you did at the end (hint: Articles going for a GA or FA review are going to expect a higher level of copy editing). Make sure to read all the rules on the request page before beginning. Have fun! ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 02:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I picked Persian embroidery ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 01:19, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It looks like you'll have to choose another one because of what Baffle gab1978 said on your talk page here. ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 16:18, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm working on Andrea Liberovici ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 13:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I appreciate it. :) I'm on vacation for the next week or so, so I may not be available if you need help. ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 00:00, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm done with the ce ~ Marcus1093 (talk) 00:50, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Lesson 5: Manual of Style
The Manual of Style is the style guide for all Wikipedia articles. Sometimes adopters neglect giving a lesson on it, but I think the MOS a very important and necessary part of Wikipedia, and deserves its own lesson :) Here are the main points of it:

Article titles, headings, and sections

 * Article titles are like sentences, not story titles. This means that only the first word of the title and proper nouns are capitalized, not all important words. The exceptions are things like iPod and eBay, where the capitalization is weird.
 * When dealing a title that should be italicized, such as Tailchaser's Song, Django Unchained, or 30 Rock, you put italic title as the first line of the article text. This makes it appear italicized.
 * Do not use a, an, or the to begin a title unless it is part of the title of the work. For example "Economic impact of dingoes", should not be "The economic impact of dingoes". A Clockwork Orange is a correct title because "a" is part of the title of the work.
 * Titles should normally be nouns or noun phrases.
 * The final visible character of a title should not be a punctuation mark unless it is part of the name (Saint-Louis-du-Ha! Ha!), an abbreviation (Inverness City F.C.), or a closing parentheses for a disambiguation (George Washington (inventor))
 * The sections and information of an article should be organized in the following order, with the information in bold font being the proper header for that section:
 * Lead section with article summary
 * Article body with main information and sections as necessary
 * Works/Bibliography/Discography - Written or musical works by the subject
 * See also - Internal links related to the article
 * References - Notes and references
 * Further reading - Relevant publications that have not been used as sources
 * External links - Relevant websites, usually including the official website of the subject
 * Navigational boxes
 * Categories
 * Interlanguage links (if applicable)
 * Headings should not be redundant to the main subject or a higher heading (for example, if one heading was "Ecological impact", you would not have a subheading called "Ecological impact")
 * Headings should not have links or citations in the heading
 * Headings should not contain images or flag icons
 * Headings should not contain questions, unless the name of the subject is a question

Spelling and grammar in different forms of English
There are many different kinds of English from various cultural and ethnic backgrounds. To make sure the English style used throughout an article is consistent, sometimes an invisible template such as Use American English, Use British English, or Use Irish English, is placed at the top. Otherwise, it's best to try and follow the style the rest of the article is written in to keep it consistent.

Capital letters

 * Do not use capital letters for emphasis. If absolutely necessary, you can use italics.
 * Do not italicize articles title that are not the title of a work (e.g., not United Kingdom, but The Lord of the Rings)
 * Do not capitalize words such as "president" or "king" unless they apply to an honorific title (e.g. "a Scottish king" vs. "King David II of Scotland")
 * Religions (eg. Buddhism), scriptures (eg. Gospel of John), and deities (eg. Allah) are capitalized, as are specific mythical creatures such as the Minotaur and Pegasus. Pronouns for figures of veneration are not capitalized (e.g., in Catholicism, when talking about God, pronouns referring to Him are always capitalized; not so on Wikipedia).
 * Months, days of the week, and holidays are capitalized; seasons are not.
 * When dealing with scientific names, only the first word is capitalized. When dealing with taxonomic rank, all words are capitalized.
 * Common names are not capitalized (grey wolf, apple pie, calculator) unless they include a proper noun (Przewalski's horse, African violet)
 * "Sun", "earth", and "moon" are not capitalized unless personified or mentioning a specific astronomical body (e.g. The Moon orbits the Earth).
 * Do not capitalize directions. Only capitalize names of regions when they have attained proper-name status (the West Coast vs. southern Poland).
 * When it comes to institutions and places, follow their own usage (eg. The Ohio State University insists on having the "the" capitalized.)

End of lesson 5
Any questions? I have included only the very basics; there is much more at Manual of Style. There'll be a test for this lesson—pretty easy as tests go :) ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 17:03, 14 September 2015 (UTC) I just realized that I totally blanked and forgot to give you the test on reliable sources :P So Sorry! I'll post that test under lesson 3 before giving you this lesson's test. Again, my bad. ~ Anastasia &#91;Missionedit&#93; (talk) 14:54, 23 September 2015 (UTC)