User talk:ACMwiki2020/sandbox

Just a few comments for consideration
These two paragraphs can be combined to provide a rich description of Photovoice and its history. I’d suggest that you start with the title in bold followed by a definition. I’ve seen Photovoice described as a “tool,” and I imagined for a while that it was some kind of equipment or software. For that reason, I’d suggest that you say up front that Photovoice is “a process by which people can identify their community through photographs.[2][3]”

There is really great information here. I think I’d start with the definition, give the history and end with current uses. Just a note that you start two sentences in a row with the phrase, “This methodology.”

I’m wondering on which page you are planning to add this information. Krm107 (talk) 03:07, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

thank you for feedback
I appreciate the feedback. My texts need to be modified as I am never quite sure how to navigate. I plan to add my introduction to the photovoice page. ACMwiki2020ACMwiki2020 (talk) 18:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Final Wikipedia Reflective Essay
Bold text Andrea Coppola Mendes Final Reflective Wikipedia Essay


 * I have moved my final edits to the photovoice talk page.

•	Critiquing articles: What did you learn about Wikipedia during the article evaluation? How did you approach critiquing the article you selected for this assignment? How did you decide what to add to your chosen article?

I learned that Wikipedians are passionate! There are wiki articles about so many topics, and I learned that a LOT of work goes on behind the scenes to create a page, edit a page, review other’s input, re-edit, add citations, etc. The check and balance that goes into a final, approved article is extensive….is an article ever completed/ closed? Or is it always subject to review and changes? I wondered.

I decided to look at the Photovoice page. It was messy and dis-organized and I noticed that people had submitted reports of specific photovoice projects that didn’t seem to have a place there; the page needed help, and this was clearly stated on the page.

I decided after completing my photovoice mini-paper that I would add an organized and concise introductory paragraph about photovoice, which also included historical and methodological pieces. •	Summarizing your contributions: include a summary of your edits and why you felt they were a valuable addition to the article. How does your article compare to earlier versions?

I added a paragraph discussing the historical significance and methodological significance of photovoice. This also served as an introduction/ definition of photovoice with citations. I feel that I added non-biased, well researched information with reliable sources to support it.

•	Peer review: If your class did peer review, include information about the peer review process. What did you contribute in your review of your peers article? What did your peers recommend you change on your article?

For my peer reviews, I looked at edits that three peers completed. I added my input including positive feedback about the organization of their edits and the importance of how their edits helped shape the article they chose. My peers made suggestions including adding a title, and formatting suggestions for the piece I added. It was helpful.

•	Feedback: Did you receive feedback from other Wikipedia editors, and if so, how did you respond to and handle that feedback?

I did not note feedback from other editors to me, but I did get to review feedback from one Wikipedia editor to another on the talk page I was editing. It was helpful to see that they requested that the contributor remove some of the information that was actually not cited, and out of place. I agreed with the editor.

•	Wikipedia generally: What did you learn from contributing to Wikipedia? How does a Wikipedia assignment compare to other assignments you've done in the past? How can Wikipedia be used to improve public understanding of our field/your topic? Why is this important? I learned that the process for making contributions to Wikipedia is extensive, project based, and somewhat time consuming, as one can get caught up in many moving pieces. This is unlike any other assignments I have completed in my graduate experiences. I think that Wikipedia can be used to improve public understanding of countless topics. In particular, as this course focused on qualitative methodology, it seems that Wikipedia articles relating to topics in this area, would serve the public well, as a reference source, once the articles were complete. This is important, because Wikipedia can serve as a reliable source, although many scholars may discount it as not “reviewed”. It is unique because although it is not a text, or a peer reviewed article, it is still a source and can be used to build knowledge on many topics.

ACMwiki2020 (talk) 21:38, 15 April 2020 (UTC)ACMwiki2020