User:Pattycakekwan888/Reflective Essay

During my article evaluation, I thoroughly researched different topics that interested me and checked if they had an existing Wikipage or not. If they did have an existing page, I read through each page to understand the layout of information that was provided. I quickly understood that a majority of articles pertaining to a similar topic, had a similar layout. Once I had found an article topic that needed additional information or had no page at all, I checked online for any reliable and relevant information. If there was an insufficient amount of resources available, I moved onto another possible article. Another consideration was if the topic was too vague, biased, and had no relevant/credible sources to aid the formation of the article. It was a long process as I navigated the web, piling up websites that I thought looked credible and checking any database for sources ranging from books, journals, and online articles and verifying their credibility and bias. Unfortunately I did not pick a topic I was interested in because those that did interest me, lacked necessary information online. I noticed in a different article on aquarium filters, there was a sufficient amount of information missing on a specific type of filter known as diatom filters. There was no Wikilink and after further investigation, I was unable to find an article on Wikipedia about diatom filters. I already found a wide range of sources to pull from in a short period of time so I decided to stick with this article. I already understood the general layout of other articles that discussed filters, so I set up my draft layout and went from there. Filtration has multiple components and incorporates a thorough process; knowing this information allowed me to highlight different sections as “Function”, “Process”, and “Major Components”. These seemed to stand out the most considering those are the most crucial factors to understand about diatom filtration. Starting off there is a lead, which gives a brief overview of diatom filtration: its origin, how it works, what it is used for. I had already read online that diatom filters are used in a variety of applications other than aquariums. For example: diatom filtration can be used in filtering liquids such as syrups, beer, and other beverages — can also be used to purify natural resources, and swimming pool filtration. These are only a few of the applications, but since these seem to have the most readily available information online, it is safe to assume that they must be the most popular uses. In order for readers to understand what the filter is and how the components and process work together, I created another section dedicated to understanding its major components. I had a rough time understanding the components of the filter and how they worked because of the technical terms used, but after reading article after article, I was slowly able to grasp the concept of each component. Aside from the components was the process in which liquids passed through the filtration device, this is crucial in understanding the general process diatom filtration provides. Throughout the creation of the article, I made many edits and major additions based on the time constraints of the assignment along with my personal comprehension of the topic. While drafting, my initial goal was to record the sources I could possibly use and then revisit each website to gather information based on their topic and their relevance to the sub topic I was working on. But I realized this did not progress as fast as I would’ve liked due to the numerous sources available on this specific topic. Could I read each and every book, journal, and website I had initially listed in a short period of time? I could not, so I streamlined my research into only using keywords that matched each category. But, after finding so many articles I wasn’t sure how I could write out multiple sentences while citing the combined information. I dug a little deeper into google and found other scholarly articles and scientific journals; where many of them gave an overview as well as their research findings. This had an impact on the formation of my article as I realized I could combine the two topics of major components and the process into one category. Slowly adding more and more information while providing sources was my priority even if the information may have been vague. Writing something down was better than writing nothing. I was also able to learn how to use Wikipedia functions such as reflisting, adding internal Wikilinks, photos, and a navigation bar at the base of the page. My Wikipedia article is slightly incomplete and has more information that could be added. I had to remove sub topics such as regulations and further research due to certain time constraints, and I will surely revisit the page and add more. But I can definitely notice my progress since the beginning of this project, as I went from nothing to something. I was really thankful to be able to receive criticism and compliments from peers, yet it seemed like the articles of those who I peer reviewed were not complete or only had added one or two sentences to their sandbox. There were many questions I had to answer in order to complete the peer review, but since I was unfamiliar with the topic and the information provided seemed vague I could only make comments on grammatical errors and the validity of their sources. One of my peers' articles discussed relevant information on pop culture, but oftentimes mainstream media and tabloids publish false information. Since my knowledge on pop culture and certain celebrities is absent, it was hard to discern if their chosen sources were credible. In the end I was only able to peer review one person's article and all I contributed was comments regarding the addition of more content and general compliments on what was already completed. I understand that some topics are more complicated than others but I could only contribute to the given information. I believe since then, they have added more to their article which should be good as long as the content is accurate. As for those who reviewed my article, they recommended adding more contents and organizing the layout of the draft; which I have made edits based on their suggestions. I did not receive any feedback from other Wikipedia editors, but I do hope that once I decide to publish their article to the Wikipedia public database, it will not be nominated for speedy deletion. Wikipedia is an amazing resource, and although it is not considered trustworthy due to the many people that have access to editing; those who edit must meet a lot of criteria. I had always assumed that anyone could edit the articles and was unaware that edits are subject to deletion if they contain unhelpful/irrelevant/incorrect information. Besides this, Wikipedia is a great database which contains a vast amount of information covering numerous topics. All of this information is readily available at no cost to anyone in the world with an internet connection. This information provided is usually accurate and all articles have external references so it is easy to double check this information on your own. All articles are also subject to collaboration and considering there are 46,486,946 Wikipedians (increasing), any one of them may have valuable knowledge to contribute to any article. While this may be the case, all edits must be unbiased and can only contribute helpful and neutral additions. Any bias detected will be automatically deleted by Wikipedia. While discussing the range of accessibility, Wikipedia also has multilingual content, which allows translation to any language other than English. My article can be translated into other languages allowing it to be read by those around the world. Providing it to those who may not have the necessary resources is important as it promotes education worldwide. Thanks to the many moderators and bots, biased information and personal comments are automatically nominated for speedy deletion! (Is this accurate?) The topic I chose did not address a major equity gap. Although it didn’t, I hope that it can still be used by those who don’t have access to educational resources. I’m happy to have made some contribution to Wikipedia even if it is only a small contribution. It is crazy to think how information can be distributed globally in a matter of seconds, and it makes me wonder if the content I put online is stored somewhere else around the world.