User:Oyulayeva/sandbox

Week 1 (Practicing the Basics):________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Notes:

-After reading the article on Community Development, the references were reliable and appropriately referenced. All the references that were listed seemed to be as if they contained academic resources and research that was applicable to the article.

-Mainly after reviewing the article it is all relevant and the way that the section "Different Approaches" was categorized and detailed it was beneficial. Each section had proper content that seemed to thoroughly explain the definition of community development and how it all occurs and comes together. Although it is a bit lengthy overall, there are some edits that can definitely be made to make it more concise.

-The sources come from multiple books, research, and journals that focus on Urban Development, building, and community. They are the focal focus on community that have extensive research. These sources give it more credentials, and so do the authors of those particular sources.

-There is definitely information that needs to be rephrased and information that can be taken out, and other information that can be added to improve it overall. Like I have stated previously most of it is categorized pretty well, but some sections have are either too wordy and others are too simple. Although simplicity is often times very beneficial because it is easier to be understood and read, there also needs to be depth.

Week 2 (Critique an Article)__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The new article that I have chosen to compare to the Community Development article is titled Communities That Care.

-The Communities That Care article is much longer overall than the Community Development article, and contains a lot of information. There are also a lot more graphs and content in this article versus the Community Development article. This makes it more appealing and helps with supporting with what is written because many people are visual learners and having such content there in addition to the information, it makes it invaluable.

-There are a lot of facts that are referenced with appropriate and reliable references. Going through the whole article it thoroughly explains what the Communities That Care (CTC) is and the purpose of that program. It then delves into explaining the structure of it, along with a photo that contains a graph to show the explanation in a visual form. Then with the research base that is categorized into steps and a description is given, it helps the reader understand the basics.

-When I read through this long article to compare it to Community Development there were definitely some sections that I thought could be eliminated or the way that some sentences were worded could be shortened. I believe that the "Online CTC Materials" section is not necessary to have there, and that if it was eliminated then the article would still be just as valuable with all the information it already contains. Perhaps another section such as "Tested and Effective Programs" could have been eliminated because it is just a few sentences that do not seem vital to the overall article. Those two sections stood out to me the most, in a way distracted me a bit. So in comparison to Community Development Article,

-The article seemed overall neutral and it did not seem that there was heavy bias toward a particular position. It is factual based and with over 40 sources that support the claims and the factual information, it is an overall very intelligent article. The information comes from like I said 40 plus sources that when I looked through about half of them a lot of the sources are academic sources, data relevant sources that support the listed facts and numbers. Most of the sources come from scientific communities, journals, academic articles, research papers, cases, and many other credible sources.

An example of a source that is very relevant and reliable (and credible as seen below):

Fagan, A.A., Hawkins, J.D., Catalano, R.F. (2008). Using community epidemiologic data to improve social settings: The Communities That Care prevention system. In M. Shin (Ed.) Toward positive youth development: Transforming schools and community programs (pp. 292–312). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

-I checked a few links out by clicking on them and seeing if they work or not, and they definitely work and I can see the sources. The article does not contain plagiarism and if there is close paraphrasing there are citations within the article to give credit to where credit is due.

-After checking the "talk" page of the article the Wikipedia community is saying exactly this:

"I'd like to talk with the editor who tagged this article as reading like an essay. What about the article suggests it is a 'personal reflection' rather than note-worthy information that can be verified by external sources? It is neutral in tone, summarizing what Communities That Care is, and referencing research that has been done on the topic. The fact that there are few links to other articles in Wikipedia should not be a reflection of its noteworthiness. This article discusses one of many topics in the field of prevention science, which unfortunatly is not well represented on Wikipedia. Preventionbetterthancure (talk) 22:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The essay and orphan templates are independent of each other. If you click on the "history" tab at the top of the article, you can see which editor made each edit -- in this case, the "essay" tag was added by Bearcat (talk · contribs), so you might try leaving a note on his/her talk page. HTH --Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)" This was the only comment that was there in the Wikipedia community on the Talk Page and it is from the year 2009. So I disagree with this comment, and I left a more positive comment and critique of more improvements that can be done as the common goal is to make Wikipedia a more educated and improved area. I signed my name on there too with the 4 ~ that included my username and stamp time. Anyways, With the changes that have been made to this article after 2009, it really is very educational and has much to offer due to the positive feedback I provided up above.
 * -This was the article that I cited, below is the citation as I have learned from the online training of how to cite a source and page: Community of interest (computer security) Wikipedia contributors. "Community of interest (computer security)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 22 Jul. 2016. Web.  2 Jun. 2017
 *  Week 3(Choose a Topic) _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 
 * I chose the article "Community of Interest" (COI/computer security): Community of interest (computer security)
 * -After overlooking the article and reading through it, I enjoyed the simplicity of it but definitely see a lot of improvement and information that can be added. There is not a lot of data that is there, but there are plenty of terms and identifications that are present. What I think is very great and is implemented in there is the graph "COI Types and Mechanisms" that includes the segregation mechanisms, costs, and description. That is very effective and straightforward. With that what else I plan to contribute is to add information that goes more into detail about COI and the establishment of it (how it came to be about), and add references as well that are academic and credible. I want to definitely expand and make this article longer so that there is more information available to those that are going to open the page. I want to make valuable contribution, and possibly add images that are not copyright and lawful so that there are visuals within the article itself to help the reader relate to the information.
 * Some sources listed below:
 * http://dictionary.sensagent.com/community%20of%20interest%20computer%20security/en-en/ (this is to define the COI)
 * https://arc.utdallas.edu/communities-of-interest/cybersecurity (multiple research summaries that include the author and their credentials)
 * http://www.sans.org/coins/ (factual information and data)
 * https://www.mitre.org/publications/systems-engineering-guide/enterprise-engineering/enterprise-governance/communities-of-interest-andor-community-of-practice
 * Land Grant University CoP, "Applying to Become a Professional Development Community of Practice
 * The MITRE Corporation, "Leveraging the Corporation," MITRE Project Leadership Handbook.
 * Generation YES Blog—Thoughts About Empowering Students with Technology, accessed June1, 2017.
 *  Week 4 (Draft Your Article)_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 
 * As I have stated previously as to my plan as to what I can contribute it is:
 * -Adding data:There is not a lot of data that is there, but there are plenty of terms and identifications that are present. What I think is very great and is implemented in there is the graph "COI Types and Mechanisms" that includes the segregation mechanisms, costs, and description. That is very effective and straightforward.
 * -With that what else I plan to contribute is to add information that goes more into detail about COI and the establishment of it (how it came to be about), and add references as well that are academic and credible. I want to definitely expand and make this article longer so that there is more information available to those that are going to open the page. I want to make valuable contribution, and possibly add images that are not copyright and lawful so that there are visuals within the article itself to help the reader relate to the information.
 * -Merge information that is relevant and effective to this article as well as beneficial. I propose to take out some information that is irrelevant and would not hinder the article overall.
 * -Have references and sources because there are no references at all in the article.
 * "Lead Section" (Draft): Community of interest (C.O.I.) is a means by which network assets and or network users are segregated by some technological means for some established purpose. COI's are a strategy that fall under the realm of computer security which itself is a subset of security engineering. Typically, COIs are set up to protect a network infrastructure from a group or groups of users who are performing some esoteric functions. COIs are also designed to protect their user community from the rest of the enclave user population. Not only does this refer to the simplicity of the network, but it also includes a group of people that come together on different social networks that come together to share data. There are multiple examples such as Wikipedia, Facebook, Blogs, YouTube, and many more where people come together as a community of interest to work together towards a common goal, learn from each other, critique, and share ideas. These users and group of people are separated into categories and segregated into logical groups. There can be professional groups, health groups that include people interested in specific diets, business groups, self-start up groups, and so many other countless categories.
 * A CoP may operate with any of the following attributes:
 * Some sponsorship
 * A vision and/or mission statement
 * Goals and/or objectives
 * A core team and/or general membership
 * Expected outcomes and/or impacts
 * Measures of success
 * Description of operating processes
 * Assumptions and/or dependencies
 * Review and/or reflection Often CoIs span similar organizations (e.g., DoD, particularly when there is a common interest in an outcome). Individual members may be expected to:
 * Support the CoP through participation and review/validation of products
 * Attempt to wear the "one hat" associated with the CoP while maintaining the integrity and autonomy of their individual organizations.
 * Participate voluntarily with the blessing of their organizations that determine their level of participation and investment. https://www.mitre.org/publications/systems-engineering-guide/enterprise-engineering/enterprise-governance/communities-of-interest-andor-community-of-practice
 * Participate voluntarily with the blessing of their organizations that determine their level of participation and investment. https://www.mitre.org/publications/systems-engineering-guide/enterprise-engineering/enterprise-governance/communities-of-interest-andor-community-of-practice