User talk:KateyDblU

Hi, KateyDblU, and welcome to both Wikipedia and INF1001! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Here are some pages that you might find useful: If you're new to U of T, the best cheap, fresh coffee is at the Campus General Store across the street from Bissell (80 cents if you bring a mug), the great halls in University College and the Hart House library are the best and most serene places to read, and the two most important people to get to know at the Faculty of Information are Christine Chan at the front desk, and Aida, the cleaning lady.--Gabby.resch (talk) 04:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * An even more extensive resource for editing
 * What makes a topic worthy of inclusion
 * How to write a great article
 * Help pages
 * Evolution of an article

Survey
Hi Katey!

I have put together a survey for female editors of Wikipedia (and related projects) in order to explore, in greater detail, women's experiences and roles within the Wikimedia movement. It'd be wonderful if you could participate!

It's an independent survey, done by me, as a fellow volunteer Wikimedian. It is not being done on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation. I hope you'll participate!

Just click this link to participate in this survey, via Google!

Any questions or concerns, feel free to email me or stop by my user talk page. Also, feel free to share this any other female Wikimedians you may know. It is in English, but any language Wikimedia participants are encouraged to participate. I appreciate your contributions - to the survey and to Wikipedia! Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Wiki 1001 edit
Katey,

No problem! Feel free to work on the same pages that I am for the Wikipedia edit assignment. What exactly did you have in mind? Like I discussed in my proposal, I am going to focus on strengthening the concept of provenance on both the archival science and provenance pages. I will keep my edit brief and really try to define what provenance is in archival work, and how it compares to the manuscript tradition in arrangement.

Just to keep things interesting, I suggest that you take a different approach to editing these pages and cover a separate topic within them? It would be great to bring up the quality of the pages overall.

Thanks for mentioning letting me know that you're interested in these pages.

AaronRoussain (talk) 03:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I just read your message you posted on my discussion page. I am also planning on focusing on the archival science page and have in fact just finished writing a section for provenance that speaks to respect des fonds and original order. So, I suggest maybe focusing on another aspect of archival science? I really like the idea of how archival science is used in oral history records. Want to run with that one? I plan on posting my own edit really soon. Again, I have written a section on provenance that speaks to respect des fonds and original order--no need to repeat this again. Thanks! AaronRoussain (talk) 01:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Alternatively, Katey, you could focus on the provenance page and strengthen its section on archives if you really want to talk about respect pour les fonds and original order. I was going to link the two, but you can take that over if you want. AaronRoussain (talk) 02:02, 17 October 2011 (UTC)