User talk:Kaitmoe3

Topics
Tentative Topics: James Cooper J.D Salinger Ellen Hopkins

Kaitmoe3 (talk) 02:10, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Kaitmoe3, keep in mind that your topic must originate with the Norton anthology. Neither Salinger or Hopkins is represented in the textbook, so you will need to come to me and make a compelling case for why you would like to work on one of these authors. If you truly want to pursue one of them, that will probably be fine. I recommend you also think more broadly than just an author's article, You can focus on their works, or edit multiple articles connected to that author (like separate articles about different works by Cooper, for example). Your research does not ned to be purely biographical. So far as formatting goes, make sure to include subheadings on your article for all assignments, as stipulated in the assignment description. So, for this assignment you should have had a subheading like the one I've added above. Good luck! Nadinecross78 (talk) 16:27, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Revisions
Martin Delany

•I will be revising the "Writings" section of this page. It doesn't flow well and it can just look better too. •Below that, the "Works" section will get edited too. It is something that could be added to the "Writings" section and just be one section itself. •More of his work will actually be put into the new "Works" section. Not everything is listed there yet. •More will be added to the "References" section since I'll be adding to the "Works" part.

--Kaitmoe3 (talk) 12:56, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Kaitmoe3, I'm pleased with the topic you've chosen, and appreciate your ambition in working with a relatively unknown author. I agree with you about the need for most of these changes. I would recommend, in particular, focusing on the "Writings" Section. This will give you a chance to access and read criticism of Delaney's work. Right now, there are no sources to back up the claims made about what critics thought/think of his work, and this is something you can certainly address with some added literary criticism. I also recommend you look at other articles about authors who are also well known as historical figures (or for something other than writing). This may give you a better idea of how to structure this article and what might be missing from it. A couple of (non-subject-related) concerns: This assignment was posted 2 days late (and will receive a late penalty). Also, your bullet points aren't correctly formatted (they don't appear in list form). This might be my browser, but I think it more likely that you didn't use the list feature in the editing toolbar above. Finally, this section should be titled "List of Contributions." Overall, though your topic is shaping up nicely! Nadinecross78 (talk) 20:51, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Summary
The main focus for this is going to be revamping this whole "Works" and "Writings" sections. Creating one section that makes sense and flows in order of publishing date will add tremendously to the page. This will make for a page that is easier to read and aid in helping for people who may be wanting more information about Delany's writings. I will also be add to the literary criticism section of this page. Adding sources to all this section will greatly improve the article as well. As always, being able to back up what anyone says is very important.

Kaitmoe3 (talk) 05:28, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Nice work, Kaitmoe3. My only concern is that you haven't wikilinked the article again in your summary, but that's a minor concern. Nadinecross78 (talk) 00:05, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Annotated Bibliography
Biggio, Rebecca Skidmore. "The Specter of Conspiracy in Martin Delany's "Blake."" African American Review 42.3/4 (2008): 439-54. Academic Search Complete [EBSCO]. Web.

This journal I found through a search from the library website, specially Academic Search Complete. This source is a reference directly to Delany and his work "Blake". This source is valuable because adding a controversial side to this story could add some more depth to his article and show a different side to him. This source is scholarly because it is an academic journal, which has been peer reviewed. I can use this information from the journal to make credible changes to this article.

Butler, Gerry. "Delany, Martin Robison (1812-1885)." University of Washington, n.d. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

This source I found through a normal internet search. I picked it because it is a .org website so I am able to trust more than a .com website. This source is valuable to me because I can use this information to fill in the gaps with Delany's works that are there in the article. This source is a little different from the journal article I found because it's not a peer-reviewed source, therefore it's not scholarly.

Delany, Martin Robison, and Robert S. Levine. Martin R. Delany: A Documentary Reader. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina, 2003. Print.

This is a book I found through a search of the library databases, making it a scholarly source. This source is valuable because it too will help in aiding with finding the gaps in Delany's works. It will help me make sure that everything I've found so far is accurate. This is different than my other sources because it is an actual book, not an article or website.

Stanford, Eleanor. "Martin R. Delany (1812–1885)." Encyclopedia Virginia. Virginia Foundation for the Humanities, 6 Aug. 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

This might be my most useful source yet. This is a website but provides some of the most information I have been able to find about Delany. It may not be scholarly because it isn't a peer reviewed website but it has lots of information I am able to use. This isn't much different than my other sources but it will be very useful. I found this website through an internet search. I'm going to be able to use this site to add more into the works page of Delany's and make sure all of his work is there and correct.

Kaitmoe3, all of these sources will work for you, though I'm concerned that they are mostly only biographical and not literary criticism. In general, your annotations are good, but be aware that a source isn't scholarly just because you found it in the library (although in this case the Delaney book is scholarly because if its publisher). Also, only one of your annotations contains a summary of the source, and the citations are in MLA format instead of Wikipedia's format. Nadinecross78 (talk) 23:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)