User talk:Halas2019/sandbox

Article Evaluation
•	Choose an article on Wikipedia related to your course to read and evaluate. As you read, consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):

•	Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? There is a concise description in the beginning of the article that I find easy to understand. •	Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article appears neutral.

•	Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Considering Language is at the core it would be interesting to see it delved into more and not just notations from Blumer.

•	Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The links work and lead to relevant articles.

•	Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? There seem to be a lot of appropriate citations. In the one section of George Herbert Meade it seems to lean towards a very positive ideal of him but I didn’t see the notations. Specifically this sentences starts a complimentary string that ends with a citation about his classmates collecting his work to create the textbook: “Mead's influence was said to be so powerful that sociologists regard him as the one "true founder" of the symbolic interactionism tradition.”

•	Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? This article states that there are 5 central ideas to symbolic interactionism and sites Joel M Charon as the source however our reading from Module 1 differs. Lynn H Turner and Richard West list 7 in Theories of Relational Communication (page 32).

•	Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Disappointingly there are no conversations, just one student who pasted the original article so it would not be lost when they rewrote it.

•	How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. It is an assignment page for Georgetown University.

•	How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? In class these concepts are introduced to us but they aren’t spoken of specifically as much regarding how they relate specifically to modern day communication as well we do not delve into criticism as much although the module reading does touch on that.

•	Optional: Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — Halas2019 (talk) 03:43, 11 June 2019 (UTC). I asked why the 7 ideas per L H Turner and R West were not used.

Hurtful Communication
Definition

Positive effects

Negative effects

Resources: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halas2019 (talk • contribs) 20:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

https://www.ffri.hr/~ibrdar/komunikacija/seminari/Young,%202004%20-%20Hurtful%20communication.pdf

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Anita_Vangelisti/publication/298694173_Hurtful_Communication_Current_Research_and_Future_Directions/links/56f9e9d408ae95e8b6d4057f/Hurtful-Communication-Current-Research-and-Future-Directions.pdf?origin=publication_detail — Preceding unsigned comment added by Halas2019 (talk • contribs) 01:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)