User talk:Mcfarland123

Welcome!
Hello, Mcfarland123, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:24, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Ryan Whritenour peer review
I liked Ryan's article about the electric switch board this is a important part of technology, and i appreciate it greatly I'm still having issues choosing mine but i will have that fixed soon, but great article and keep up the great work. This article is very relevant to technology and the article is not to long so its a lot of info that ryan can add to it, to make it a more stronger article and hopefully wiki will keep his contributions. this article has structure and it is well put together in order from top to bottom it makes logical sense. there is only one source though. so way more info can be added to this article. Mcfarland123 (talk) 22:49, 11 July 2019 (UTC) bryan benn

July 2019
Hello, I'm GorillaWarfare. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Headphones— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. GorillaWarfare (talk) 03:44, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

assignment 5
“A Look at Headphones through Time.” Earphone Solutions, www.earphonesolutions.com/headphones-through-time.

Quirky. “Great Inventions: History and Evolution of the Headphone.” Quirky, shop.quirky.com/blogs/news/great-inventions-history-of-headphone.

Ssense. “A History of Headphone Design.” Ssense, 20 Feb. 2017, www.ssense.com/en-us/editorial/culture/a-history-of-headphone-design.

Stamp, Jimmy. “A Partial History of Headphones.” Smithsonian.com, Smithsonian Institution, 19 Mar. 2013, www.smithsonianmag.com/arts-culture/a-partial-history-of-headphones-4693742/.

“The History of Headphones.” Visual.ly, visual.ly/community/infographic/technology/history-headphones.

“The History of Headphones.” Cool Material, 5 Sept. 2017, coolmaterial.com/roundup/history-of-headphones/.

“What Are Headphones?” Computer Hope, 30 June 2019, www.computerhope.com/jargon/h/headphon.htm.

Assignment 6
These initial headphones of 1880’s had a single piece that was to be set over the shoulder. It had a weight of 10 pounds. While the design of headphones introduced by Baldwin is much similar to what we see now a days. Nathaniel got success for his invention, he got an order to make headphones for the U.S Navy. It was the first headphone to have pieces for both ears. With time headphones have gone through tremendous development. And these later developments of headphones were made by Beyer dynamic, and AKG, with the production of DT-48 dynamic headphones in 1937 and K120 in 1949 respectively.

Both achievements were enough to surprise the people of the time, pushing one’s thinking beyond the limits. After that in 1958 came the stereo headphones marking again a distinction from the former. This invention was made by a jazz musician and audiophile John C. Koss. In 1959 came the electrostatic headphones, the SR-1’s, showed in Tokyo. And in 1968, Koss again gave a move to his talents and produced ESP-6, the first electrostatic headphone made by U.S. These latest headphones were way more lighter than the traditional ones, e.g. 10 pounds.

They weighed around 2 pounds. However, the invention of Walkman brought the most favorable change in the market of headphones as well as in its variety. Sony Walkman headphones were the smallest of all the headphones ever produced before. And they stood as an inspiration for all the headphones that would be produced later. In the ground of technology headphones have hit the shelves. They are paired with almost everything. For example, Computers, Laptops, Mobile Phones, Tablets, MP3’s, MP4’s, LCD’s and many more devices carry with them a need or an expectation for the connection of headphones with them.

Now a days we see a range of headphones: Closed-back headphones, open-back headphones, on-ear headphones, over-ear headphones, in-ear headphones and earbuds etc. all are just different forms of the headphones.

We were still in the 80’s and 90’s when we witnessed some modifications and innovations in the already much advanced headphones e.g. earbuds, neckband headphones and noise canceling headphones. It was Dr. Amar Bose who invented noise canceling headphones, intentionally created for the pilots to escape deafening noise and distractions in the cockpits. The last but not at all least, in fact the most craziest and bold step was taken by Dr. Dre and his business partner Jimmy Iovine in this ground. They, using the name of their brand ‘Beats by Dre’, introduced Beats headphones. Like all other products of this brand these headphones were also over-priced. The price of these products was not based on the quality of these products but more on the name of this brand. “Lil’ Wayne even purchased a $1 million dollar pair of diamond studded Beats headphones. “But this also doesn’t mean that these headphones are nothing.

assignment 9 completed
i saw some feed back from wikipedia someone and i think it was useful it made me go back and make sure my info was more accurate. they actually took it down and told me that it sounded like i was freely talking etc so it made me go back and do more research and revise things and make it a little bit more accurate

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
i cant really tell how this article was rated but i can see that it wasnt apart of any other wikiproject, update the article was rated b-class — a moderately developed article Mcfarland123 (talk) 22:42, 11 July 2019 (UTC) bryan benn

Headphones
Hi, I saw that your draft was moved back to your userspace. It looks like what you created was a content fork of the existing article on headphones, so it was moved back. Looking at your additions to the draft here, here, and here, I have some notes:


 * The content looks to be almost entirely unsourced and in some of the edits, were completely unsourced. All content must be backed up with reliable sources that explicitly state the claims being made in the article. These sources must also be placed in-line. Adding content without sourcing will be seen as original research, that is content that you created based on your own experiences and research - even if the material you're pulling on doesn't actually state what you have written.


 * Do not use point of view, subjective writing styles. The only time that an opinion or viewpoint should be used is when you're directly attributing it to a specific person or source along the lines of "According to This Person...". The reason for this is that opinions are incredibly subjective and there is no guarantee that the next person will hold the same viewpoint or agree with your estimation. This is especially important to keep in mind when it comes to major claims such as something being the best, smallest, or what have you, as these are things that absolutely need to be attributed to a reliable source where the person has clearly done enough research to be able to make a statement like that. Even then it's important to attribute since the person may not have researched all areas and as such may claim that something was the smallest when in reality another product put out by X company or in Y country was actually smaller.


 * Be careful of grammar and punctuation. Avoid using sentence fragments.


 * Avoid writing in a conversational tone with wording like "we" and "you", as this doesn't fit the more formal, encyclopedic tone on Wikipedia. Wikipedia also uses third person, which wouldn't use words like "we". You can see this page for more information on this.


 * The sourcing you listed in the third edit had problems with reliability. For example, you used sites like Quirky and Earphone Solutions as sources - places that are aimed at selling something to the consumer. This poses an issue of neutrality since e-commerce sites are far more likely to write something in a way that makes them look positive and so they can work in mentions or links to their products. Even if this wasn't an issue, there is still a question of how much fact-checking and editorial oversight is actually put into the stuff they publish. In most cases they have little to no editorial oversight, definitely not enough to where it would be seen as reliable on Wikipedia. In the case of Visually, their goal is to sell content creation - in other words they'll write whatever anyone wants them to write. We can't really trust that what they're writing is accurate.
 * As far as Computer Hope goes, while they're not trying to sell readers anything, there's still no evidence that they have a strong editorial and factchecking process that would make them a reliable source. In order to show that they're usable we'd have to show where they're used as a reliable source by reliable sources such as academic and scholarly journals or trusted newspapers.
 * Offhand the only source that's really usable is the Smithsonian one. They're a well known group of museums and research institutions with a very thorough fact checking and editorial process. To be honest, I would recommend sticking to academic and scholarly databases like JSTOR when it comes to research, as there's no guarantee that what is brought up by a Google or other internet search engine will be reliable. A quick search in JSTOR brings up things like this and this that could be useful. The database also has headphones as a category term, so you can look through the works who have headphones as a key category term, which means that your results are more likely to be pertinent.

Offhand the content does have several things that need to be resolved, so I wouldn't move anything live until you've resolved the points I've brought up above. Let me know if you have any questions - I know that this can seem like a lot so I want you to know that I'm always here as a resource. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:49, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

reflective essay
I felt that adding my value to the article gave it a little more significance because I think that what I had to add also gives the article itself more value because of the extra added information being put into it. The way my article compares to an earlier version is that there is more information and changed a few things to make it easier to understand certain concepts. No, I got my peer review from Wiki not an actual classmate, which gave help me get a better perspective from a non-classroom mindset on the article and how it can be more appealing when reading and talking to the audience. They informed me to make a few editing changes as well do more research do make sure that the information being inputted was solid. I did receive feedback from other Wiki editors, some of it was good and some of it was bad, but not in a way that it bothered me but, in a way, to help me make better revisions as well, when I do future articles. I handled the feedback pretty well as I am all for self-criticism it is one of those things that helps me grow because someone else can see what I cannot from a different view or perspective. Also, I have learned that not all feedback is personal but to help give insight to things and open my awareness. What I've learned to contributing to Wikipedia is that it actually helps and makes a difference when it comes to providing information about topics people are interested in. Not only that but I can say that I put my energy towards something small but meaningful and beneficial to someone else's learning. This assignment was different because I had to think outside the box and look at the project from a different angle then I am normally used to doing things. It can be helped to improve the public's understanding on the field/topic because Wiki is usually one of the first sources that come up when looking for information. So, that helps