User talk:AMDomG/sandbox

Hey everyone! What we have so far looks good. I created a References section so we can officially cite our sources. I tried it for mine and it's pretty cool. In reading some of the sections, I think the major thing we need to remember is to write with a neutral point of view. I know that many essays I've had to write have required a little bit of my own opinion, so it's easy to fall into the same habit, but we just need to state the facts surrounding our respective issues. Gsrogers (talk) 23:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

RE: I agree with what has been said, we should all be looking to cite (Carol et. al. really stressed the importance of citing everything we're doing on Wikipedia) and focus on neutrality throughout the article. It might be helpful if we try and partner up so we can focus on each part of the article more closely. This isn't necessary, but it might be worth thinking about. Kcahlber (talk) 14:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I too agree with what's been said and especially with the partnering up idea. What we have looks great so far but we also have to plan how to present the stub since we will all be presenting the entire thing as a group. poelliot —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.59.51.25 (talk) 02:34, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree. I will go through and re-edit my parts that are clearly a little biased and (try) and add the references. I am still figuring out how to link and not mess it all up...I am sure I'll get there.

Also - everyone please feel free to edit the lead - it is very broad and is lacking what I would consider a whole lot of substance. If everyone added a sentence or so and sourced something from their section I think it could really strengthen it. ClaireStum

Hey everyone, Glad to see you've gotten started. There is a lot of work to do here - this assignment consists of more than just copying and pasting your papers. Start by getting rid of biased writing. Don't be afraid to change someone else's writing. This is a very important part of being a member of the community! As an icebreaker, The first person to edit someone else's writing and use an appropriate edit summary to describe it will receive an extra credit point. The edit has to be within reason - we aren't looking for a human spell checker or grammar slammer here. Do not be worried about offending anyone. You can justify your change on the the talk page - and if the person really disagrees they can always revert the changes. After getting rid of bias, continue by eliminating any editorial voice (See first sentence of your lead). This article itself should have no overall "voice" - it just presents the facts. For instance, do not write: "some people think that...xyz... is terrible". Instead, represent opinions by using published sources and quoting them. If you are quoting someone, be able to justify why their opinion is relevant or notable. Try, "xyz has been opposed by several special interest groups. These include a, b, and c." With citations for each group you list. By class on Friday, there shouldn't be very many facts that aren't represented by sources. also, be sure to LOG IN before you make an edit. We cannot give credit to an ip address. This has happened on this page 5 times so far. Good luck, and have fun!

ps. By TONIGHT, your TA should receive: 1.) each students username, 2.) a link to a newly created stub on your selected topic that follows the conventions we discussed, and 3.) a cc'ed email that you sent to your mentor of choice. Also, User:Alin_(Public_Policy) will be attending our class on Friday. You may remember her as the disembodied voice from the skype session. Take advantage of the opportunity to ask her any questions you might have. AMDomG (talk) 17:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Be sure to consider The Manual of Style http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MOS AMDomG (talk) 01:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)