User:Ousainou Adeniyi/NMAC 3108 Journal

= Journal #1: Week 1 - Introduction = Hello my name is Ousainou Adeniyi. I am a senior IT major with the concentration of Integrated Digital Media & Game Design. I’m an occasional dabbler in podcasting and blogging but nothing too serious or steady. I am also proud member of the Big Blue (A.K.A. Best Buy), so I am pretty much familiar with the latest products, services, & technologies surrounding digital media. If everything works out well, I will be graduating at the end of this upcoming term in the Spring of 2020. I am ecstatic to be taking this course with everyone and hope we can learn and grow together! = Journal #2: Week 1 = I thought that with my little experience blogging, I would easily get the hang of Wikipedia editing, but I've found it is surprisingly a lot more complicated that I first thought. I'll definitely have to go back reread chapters 1 & 2 as well as the provided articles before I move forward, just so I can feel more comfortable with this sort of writing.

= Journal 3: Week 2 - Article Evaluation =

Overview
The article of evaluation is Oral history. It is an academic Wikipedia article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale and has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.The article begins with a primary overview on Oral history, including its technical aspects as well the distinct concepts behind the term that differentiates it from any other methods of historical information gathering, such as the practice of conveying aural interviews into audio & video recordings, and of course written transcriptions. The article emphasizes the similarities as well as the differences between Oral history and its broader counterpart, Oral tradition, which is a term that is sometimes used in a more general sense to refer any information about past events that people who experienced them tell anybody else. The article then proceeds to go into further detail about the different examples and practices of Oral history around the world, throughout Europe to the United States and the Middle East to across Asia.

Academics
The 2nd half of the article details the academic, structural, and legal aspects of Oral history. There is a brief introduction of some of the most well-known institutions and esteemed academic organizations that were formed to further the field Oral history. This includes one of the oldest historical research centers devoted to Oral history, the University of Columbia’s Center for Oral History. The article then lists the standardized methods behind the practice of Oral history employed by numerous professionals across many other fields of study, such as Journalism, Linguistics, and even Sociology. These practices include the attainment of “informed consent” from the interviewed, as well as providing said interviewee a deed of gift, which provides certain copyright ownership rights over the interview’s publication.

Conclusion
Oral history is a well detailed and structured Wikipedia article. There are no irrelevant topics or details within this article that may cause distraction or confusion for readers. While the article does maintain relevant information, it could do a better job in giving more examples oral history being preserved digitally. In fact, it still refers to video & audio “tapes” as modern methods used in recording oral history. There is little to no mention of current modern practices of Oral history using current technologies such social & digital media, i.e. YouTube & via podcasting.

The article keeps a neutral tone without inputting any personal biases or vague wordings. It does a good job of providing Western & Eurasian examples of Oral historical practices around the world. However, on that same note, it surprisingly has very little to offer for South American and African oral history as examples. Giving the fact that this article is part of WikiProjects, it is unsurprising how well ordered and professional its Talk page is. All the links seem to work and are relevant to the topics within the article. Most of the discussions within the page are about modifying and updating links and references, which goes to show the effort the editors put to keeping the article has relevant up to date as possible.

= Journal 4: Week 2 - Interesting Topics #1 = I stumbled on this particular Wikipedia article that listed all of the confirmed Sexually Active Popes throughout our history. Interestingly enough, I first came across this wiki page through another article written my Caitlin Dewey of the Washington Post, in which she listed the top most fascinating Wikipedia articles, based on the nominations of prominent Wiki enthusiasts & community members and a number of other notable journalists within the industry. Note: It is likely that I will continue to refer to Dewey’s list from time-to-time in later Journals.

I found this article very fascinating for many reasons. Given the fact Wikipedia for all intense and purposes, is a neutral 3rd party online Encyclopedia, it is not very common for it to read like the everyday tabloid news. While there may be the expectation for a certain level of scandalous content provided, it is usually under the umbrella of a broader and serious topic on Wikipedia. However, this article by itself is quite the head-turning. Another reason is just for the interesting discussions behind it. If you took a look at the article’s talk page, you’ll find out that the ongoing debates & discussion are just as fascinating as the article’s topic. There are some wiki members who believe that the article lacks enough importance for it to be categorized under WikiProject, while others debate its legitimacy & ratings. Note: There was even a major vote taken in 2005 for the entire article’s deletion, which resulted as a save.

Whether is due to the unique content of this article, it’s curious edit choices, or the interesting discussions within its talk page, I would highly recommend taking look at this article.

= Journal 5: Week 3 - Three Potential Articles of Choice = After performing research on the most renown topics, place, events, and things within Middle Georgia for my article selection, I’ve narrowed it down to 3 potential subject that have caught my interest the most. First is contributing to the Sidney Lanier Cottage article, the birthplace and childhood home of the prolific southern American musician, poet and author, Sidney Lanier, located in Macon, Georgia. The second article of interest is the Macon Cannonball House; it is another notable historical building of Middle Georgia named because of the damages in took during the Civil War due to Union Cannon fire. My third option is to write my own original wiki article from scratch about my elementary school, Alexander II, which is not only prominent science and math magnet elementary school, but also a deeply historical institution that is over a century old.

= Journal 6: Week 3 - Topic of Choice = After much consideration, I’ve decided to write my own original article from scratch & pick my third choice, my former primary school, Alexander II, for 2 major reasons. First, it partially due to it being original and fresh, which is definitely a positive in my books. While I’m aware that any sort of honest contribution in any form on Wikipedia would be well appreciated, I do personally feel like I would be contributing much more by developing fresh new content, rather than tagging on some extra tidbit on another preexisting article that a community member had already come up with. The second reason is for my own benefit and growth. It is my opinion that it'll be more beneficial for me to experience creating a entire Wikipedia article from the very beginning and experience its development so that I can learn the entire process behind such an effort—i.e. the researching, the rough drafts, etc.—especially given the course we are in.

= Journal 7: Week 4 - Copy-edit & Evaluation = This week, I copy-edited the wiki article about the Macon Telegraph. This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale and of Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. According to its Talk Page, it lacks “sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations” which I strongly agree with. Most the edit I accomplished were inline citation & external links.

Another issue I had with the article was some of it's tonal shifts from neutral third-person to a more conversational manner in which the article was written. The editor(s) even an one point, used parenthesis to directly talk to the readers like he/she was given some extra tidbit of gossip. I was completely thrown off, it went against what Carroll’s point about neutralism and professional etiquette. Due to the fact I am still in training, I did not feel confident in completely removing the parenthesized line, so I removed a word to make the statement more neutral and less conversational sounding, however I wanted to completely remove that entire statement for it brought no significant contribution except to let reader know the first publication of the Telegraph was written in All caps. I decided to leave a suggestion for such a change. I’ll keep an eye out to see if any changes will be made or a response to my post.

= Journal 8: Week 4 - Ongoing Progress & Source Finding = I continued my progress a with familiarizing myself with copy-editing, Talk page discussions, and source finding. Now more so than ever, I feel as though I have a better grasp on our textbook. I am not sure whether the combination the online training and the hands-on practice, but I able to not only identify the techniques & practices I’ve been reading about but to also be able to apply them in my own digital writing. Just being able to use critical thinking to figure out whether another wiki writer who probably has much more experience than me is properly editing his/her article, has given me much more confidence in my own writings.

I’ve begun gather enough sources to start building my article and I have just realized the difficulty of finding the proper sources needed. It is not simple as look for the first page you find on Google to use a proper source. I also realized the benefit of learning to use advance search tools, when looking for sources. It greatly narrows down and specifies your search findings, which increases your research efficiency and decrease your time costs. For example, if one is trying to write about and recent or updated event, your sources would more accurate when you adjust your search result’s published dates using the time range search tool.

= Journal 9: Week 5 - Peer Reviews = After reading the reviews of other classmates, I have come to the realization that I definitely need to pick up the slack. While I am still source gathering phase, there are some who already begun working on their article’s second draft. I’ve learned that peer reviews do not only provide critical analysis and observation from peers, but also allows for the sharing of experiences for better development. This of course both ways for those reviewing and those who read such reviews. Then reason for this is because one can learn from analyzing articles for peers just as much, if not more, that reading the reviews from others. It is more a matter of perspective....

= Journal 10: Week 5 - Sandbox Applications = The extent in which we as writers/editors can make use of Sandboxes is quite surprising to me. For the longest time, I viewed my Sandbox as simply a temporary spot to copy and paste my writings before moving them to their proper locations. However, I now see that it is actually much more beneficial than that. It is an effective method to build, test, write and publish our articles and codes without having to worry about them been viewed by the public as an unfinished product, but at the same time, it still works as a functioning and fully equipped Wikipedia article all the same.


 * I also recently realized just how important the sandbox is. Compared to using a word processor to build articles, the sandbox is pretty much the same as a Wikipedia article page as you said. This helps a lot with avoiding mistakes when copy and pasting information back and forth. I'm glad you realized how useful it can be and I hope this new information will help you as you continue to work on your article.— Sabub (talk) 01:35, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

= Journal 11: Week 6 - Social Planning = Honestly, I have not done much social media planning with my article. This was because I was under the false assumption that given the structure of Wikipedia as an online community encyclopedia, there was not much use for public relations management and social media promotions in this context. However, just as Carroll stated in Chapter Nine's Watching the Game, Not the Ball, I was so focused the 'encyclopedia ' part of Wikipedia that I neglected the fact that is still an Online Community as well. Meaning that by default, social communication and public relations are essential elements of Wikipedia as a whole.

Another very significant topic of Chapter Nine that I very much resonated with was that of Listening, and its major importance in this Digital Age of Public Relations. Even though there are countless new method of social interaction using numerous platforms in today Digital Age, (i.e. Facebook, Twitter, etc.) we cannot forget that there is just important—if not more so, element in this two-sided coin that is part digital/social communications, which of course as referred to prior is Listening.

I believe in this today's online space where everyone is trying to have their voice and opinion be heard, being a good listener is key to having a successful public relations with your audience/reader/followers. In Wikipedia, making proper use your Talk Page for civil discussion and communication is a good application of Public relation management. Being capable of taking criticisms and improving upon them, as well having constant dialogue and communication between community members and readers another example of good PR listening.


 * Some thoughtful points here, especially about listening and your talk page. You should practice your referencing with Carroll as a source. —Grlucas (talk) 10:48, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

= Journal 12: Week 6 - = This week I stumbled on a surprising hurdle I was not planning for, and that was how to actually begin writing my article. When I was researching my article of choice—Alexander II Magnet School, I immediately knew that it was the perfect choice for me due to my own personal experience as a student who went there, as well as it being a historical educational institution with ties to early development of Middle Georgia. With the number of sources I gathered, I assumed that it would be a breeze for me to start writing the article from scratch.

However, once I completed my transfer of content from my Sandbox to Wikipedia’s main domain, I immediately felt a major pressure fall on me. The best way to explain it, is like that of having stage fright. The most serious thing I have probably ever posted on the web prior to this course was a blog review post—not counting comment sections and class YouTube video assignments. It was not until that moment, that I realized that my writings may potential be viewed and read my more people than I’ll ever meet in my lifetime—which is still too ridiculous for me to fully grasp for a no-named college student like myself.

I am aware that something like this should not be holding me back, but I would be lying if I do not admit that the reason I am probably hesitate is because I am worried about how future readers may think of my content and writing. Would they just think of it as too amateur and unprofessional or dull and informative? My answer to this was to work on the Article Talk Page, giving a brief explanation as to why I was motivated to  introduce this information to community and how much I would appreciate to get any instructive  feedback both editors and readers to improve my writing on this article. I admit that I find it slightly amusing that without really thinking about it, I employed Carroll’s advice on good public relations with readers.
 * It can be scary to post something out there. We do have the support of Dr. Lucas and the rest of the class, so I hope this makes it a little easier on you! I think it's wonderful that you are writing about a place that you have firsthand knowledge of. I'm sure that this will help you to stay on track while writing! Best of luck! -LynzeeWhite (talk) 17:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I get what you mean about starting a new article and then having many other people be able to look at it. It looks like you have a good start to your lead section so far. I am excited to see what else you add in the future!! NVaden (talk) 20:13, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not ridiculous. It is normal for anyone posting to the internet to be anxious. But you don't have to let that anxiety control you. Use it as a tool to make yourself better. I am still hesitant about moving my content to the main page of my article. I haven't done it yet because I want to make sure the writing style I used to write my content doesn't clash with what is already on the article page so I keep going back and forth and editing in a word document. So know that you aren't alone in this. Jkoplin1 (talk) 16:28, 12 July 2019 (UTCd)Jkoplin1

= Journal 13: Disastrous Field Trip = I will admit, that a part me does not want to reveal this story just because of how embarrassing it is. However, given this is a journal entry, there would be no better place to do so. This week, we were encouraged to take field trips to the locations of our article of choice. I was personally excited about this, not only because it made me feel as though I was a professional journalist but also because I was having issues finding any free license or public domain photos for my article of choice, Alexander II Magnet Elementary School.

Since I lived in Macon, it was not too much for me to get there quickly to take some photos of the school. I was even hoping to maybe get some indoor photos as well if the school allowed me to do so. I easily arrived at the school’s location around noon and it honestly looked exactly the same as I remembered when I attended it. I noticed that there were a lot more kids playing in park in front of the school as well as a number parked cars than I would have expected given that this was summer break, but I just assumed that it was either due to Summer classes of some sort of planned event from the school.

While still outside the school grounds, I planned to take some photos with my digital camera of the school’s entrance and surroundings before heading in to try to see if I could talk my way in. As you may have already guessed from this journal entry’s title, things did not go as planned. Before I could even take a single photo, I was stopped by a woman who I can only guess to be either a parent or some sort of school faculty member. She very politely inquired in a roundabout way, why a grown adult such as myself, was taking photos with kids around. Not even considering what she was trying to imply, I immediately replied that it was for “my Internet assignment” (which looking back now, probably was not the best response I could have made). I was going to further explain to her about my Wikipedia article and to ask whether she was a teacher at the school to see if I could ask to get an interview; but she immediately did an about-face-turn and speed-walked to another woman who was watching the kids. While I don’t honestly know what they were talking about, given that they kept glancing back at me during their conversation, I decided that it would be for the best I just left immediately before things took an even weirder turn.

Honestly, I don’t feel angry or affronted about what happened. I understand why those women were naturally worried about a stranger with a camera taking photos around kids. Plus, I did not handle the situation in best way possible. I probably should have first talked to a school faculty member and ask for permission to take photos on school grounds, or better yet, call ahead before driving to the school. I just found the whole situation embarrassing and a huge lesson for myself. In short, I did not get the photos, nor I do plan on ever setting foot near any elementary schools for the foreseeable future.


 * Sorry about this. Maybe next time, call the school to let them know what you're doing. It is a public building, and you have every right to take a couple of photographs. —Grlucas (talk) 13:58, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

= Journal 14: Aftermath = If you have been following the tale of my horrendous field trip experience from the previous journal thirteen’s entry, then you are already aware that I never did get those photos I wanted, nor do I plan on ever trying to do so again. However, if you go ahead and check out my article at this moment, you would notice that I already created an info-box for the article, which includes (yes you guess it). I was able to find this image in a collage assignment from a freshman course (yes, I am actually one of those rare individuals who horde all of their works).

The biggest problem is that while I very clearly remember taking some photos for that collage assignment, I am not sure that was one of them, or whether I just pulled it off the Internet. While I finally decided to go ahead and upload the image to wiki-commons and use it in my article, I do still plan on following up with a Staff member to make sure it truly is a free license image I am using.

Another issue related to this topic is that because I plan to dedicate a major portion of my article towards the school’s founding and historical background, I want to add more images to bring the article to live. One of my main sources is the school’s Bibb county website, which contains a couple of old black and white photos that I really want to use for my own article (especially that of the school’s founder, Elam Alexander) however surprisingly, the website contains very little of its own sources and I am not sure whether those photos are open-source as I assume they are, or not.


 * I'm sorry to hear you are having trouble. I will say you are taking good steps though. It is definitely a good idea to check with Wikipedia staff to see if your picture is okay. I think it will be fine if you aren't able to get all the pictures you want. Since Wikipedia is more about the written aspects, you should focus your energy more into the writing and information. I wish you luck as you continue working on your article.— Sabub (talk) 04:48, 14 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Wow! That is frustrating! If you can't use the picture, have you considered going back on the weekend? If their playground isn't open to the general public, you might have better luck then. Fingers crossed! --Sara Kathryn 00:18, 15 July 2019 (UTC) (talk)


 * Honestly, I would hate to have to be the one to tell you, but if you don't know 100% that you own the full copyright to the image of the school and can thus legally transfer it to Wikimedia Commons, then I think you should push for its deletion immediately. It is better to have no image than it is to not be in policy compliance.—TSchiroMGA (talk) 02:47, 15 July 2019 (UTC)


 * It is extremely frustrating and I wish I had taken some photos of this when I was actually an on campus student. I have tried looking in both wiki and flickr commons and come to no avail. Looks like this weekend I might either be trying to get a full license or going on the full field trip down to Macon. Strasburg7312 (talk) 04:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

= Journal 15: Reflective Essay =

General Thoughts
We are finally here at the end road, and I have to say there were times when I thought I wouldn’t be able to make it, although I am very grateful that I did. I found this course to be such a unique and challenging experience—more so than any other course I previously taken. I specifically chose the words unique & challenging to describe this experience. This course was unique in its teaching methods; allowing us students to apply the craft we learned on a far wider stage—the Web. Rather than just being difficult or hard, this course challenged us to effectively use the knowledge and tools we gained from our lessons for real hands-on experience.

Evaluating Articles
I evaluated the article page, Oral History, which was very insightful experience when I began to work on my own article, Alexander II Magnet School. Learning how to effectively evaluate articles, was an essential skill that I needed to acquire for this course. It not only helped me assess an article’s quality by being able to recognize and differentiate between good and bad sources, it also honed my critical thinking skills, giving me a better eye for good writing.

During the evaluation process, it is essential for us writers/editors to review 5 major traits of said article: Lead, Structure, Content, Tone, Source.


 * The lead section is a very important part of any Wikipedia article. Is the first thing that most readers look at and its purpose is to summarize the article as a whole, without being overly detailed but still providing a general idea of what to the rest of article will cover and be about. If done right, every major talking point and segment topic should be briefly covered within the lead section of said article. Most important of all, when evaluating a lead section, it should be as clear and easy to understand as possible.


 * An article’s structure should be viewed as the bones and guiding foundation for any Wikipedia article. Without this form of unique structuring, there is very little to differentiate wiki articles from any typical research papers. The purpose of such structuring is to categorize and simplify the content of an article into individual segments using headings and subheadings. When evaluating the structure of a wiki article, we are gauging its clarity, how well organized it is, as well as the level ease using it.
 * The content of an article is of course the most important aspect of any Wikipedia article. Using an analogy, if as state before, the structure is the very foundation of an article, then the content is the very build blocks of said article. When assessing an article’s content, we are evaluating all aspects of said content; meaning that we are looking the its level of accuracy. How up-to-date is the information given, as well as how broad and detailed it is? Only by gauging all these interlinking aspects of an article’s content, can we have a good sense of how well balance it is.
 * An article’s tone refers to the point view the article is written in. When evaluating wiki articles, we weigh the level neutrality of said point-of view. As part of the Wikipedia community, it our jobs to develop unbiased works that different viewpoints from reliable and sources.
 * Sources are one the most integral components of any trustworthy article. It is the biggest factor for Wikipedia’s credibility. Wikipedia is an open-source online community encyclopedia, which means anyone with access to the internet can freely join it and submit their own work. For, Wikipedia, this level of accessibility is both its greatest strength as well as weakness. To prevent and limit the abuse and misuse of public information, the online community is extremely stringent that all it provided content is well sourced. In fact, a large part of the editing process one does when working on wiki articles has to do with proper sourcing.

Given how severe the rules are for sourcing in Wikipedia, it goes without saying that its evaluation process is just as rigorous, if not more so. We are to pay great attention to how accurate an article’s sources are. How credible is it? Does the source have an unbiased point-of-view? How many sources does said article have—after all, it is common for a single article on Wikipedia to have hundreds of different sources per page.
 * The different aspects of source editing refers to properly citing and referencing content on a Wikipedia page as broadly as possible. Whenever something is written on a wiki page, it should have an accounted source from which the writer obtained said information. Sourcing is by far the greatest tool and shield community members can use to garner credibility for Wikipedia as a professional and legal source information.

Efforts & Contributions
Most my efforts and contributions were accomplished in step-by-step basis. I created several rough drafts of my article that I kept as a document file separately from my article’s page until I was ready to upload it.

I began working on the general content of the article first, based on the research I gathered throughout this course. After going through grammatical editing, I slowly shaped out my article in the way I most preferred. Once I was satisfied with the result of the final draft, I uploaded the bare contents of my draft to the article’s page. The next thing for me was to insert all the necessary inline citations, before finally working on my major references.

While I cannot say this method, mine is the best approach for everyone to use, it quite suited me since I was never comfortable with leaving unfinished work on my page for the whole public to see before its completion.

Peer Review
My peer review on a classmate's page about the Macon International Cherry Blossom Festival, I made sure to acknowledge her efforts and point out what I liked about her choice of edits, but I also sure explain that there was further room for improvement that she could make use of significantly improve the article's overall quality of content–specifically the lack citations as well Japanese references given the origin of the festival.

Feedback
Feedback were by far the biggest contributing factor for my improvement throughout this course. I while I did find a lot of the training on wiki.edu helpful, I can honestly say that most of the growth came as a direct result of one of my peers and/or instructor(s) reaching out to me. A good example of this was during last week's field trip assignment when I was having a lot difficulty with uploading my images. I really wanted to use some of the images I found during my research, but I was unsure whether I had right to upload those images in the first place. One of the wiki staff members that I had reached out to previously contacted me on my Talk Page and simplified the complicated jargon that was the copyright training into a more understandable manner. Due to that occurrence, I was not only able to figure how Wikipedia's image copyright regulations really worked, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that I could upload those images given that they were both originally taken before 1923, which made them very likely an open-sourced.


 * "Unique and challenging." Well said. I concur: you have grown quite a bit in the class and overcome hurdles with persistence. Well done. —Grlucas (talk) 11:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

= References =