User talk:Nadinecross78

Topics
Frank Norris Nadinecross78 (talk) 21:46, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

American Renaissance (literature) Nadinecross78 (talk) 21:48, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

List of Contributions
on Frank Norris Nadinecross78 (talk) 16:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The article about Norris provides no information about his extensive output of non-fiction. I will revise the “Career” section to include more information about this element of Norris’s work.
 * Right now, the “Work” section includes only one theme of Norris’s work: corporate greed. My research tells me that Norris’s work was also influenced by evolutionary theory, but that information is confusingly included in the “Life” section of his page. I will reorganize the “Life” and “Career” sections to clarify that there are more themes in Norris’s work, and to trace how the evolutionary themes influence specific works.
 * The section on “Anti-Semitism” may give too much weight to a minor element of Norris’s work, and might paint a biased picture of the author. I also noticed that another user is concerned about this issue in the Talk page for Norris. While his work might be anti-Semitic, I wonder if there are other critics who have refuted this claim or placed it in better historical context. I will do some research on anti-Semitism in turn-of-the-century America and see if this section needs any clarification. I may also need to move this section under “Career.”
 * There is no “Reception” section on this page. I will read some reviews of Norris’s work and create this section.
 * "A Plea for Romantic Fiction” doesn’t appear in the “Works” section at all. I will add “A Plea for Romantic Fiction” and any other works I find that are not mentioned here. I will also add external links to these works if I can find them online.

Annotated Bibliography
Addams, Jane (1960). Jane Addams: A Centennial Reader. New York: Macmillan.

This book, which I found through a search of the library catalog, collects many of Jane Addams’s short writings. They date from the late 1800s and early 1900s. Each chapter features writings on a specific theme. This book includes lectures and newspaper articles that were not peer-reviewed, so it is not a scholarly source. However, it is a good primary source that I can use as evidence. Chapter 2 “Position of Women” and Chapter 7 “International Peace” will be most relevant to the section I plan to add to the article about how Addams argued against war using gendered language, especially language related to motherhood.

Fischer, Marilyn (2006). “Addams's Internationalist Pacifism and the Rhetoric of Maternalism.” NWSA Journal 18.3: 1-19.

Jane Addams objected to U.S. involvement in World War I. Fischer argues that although Addams used “maternalist rhetoric” to promote pacifism, Addams did not believe that women are naturally more peaceful than men (1). Instead, Fischer claims, Addams’s use of maternal language was a strategic decision to appeal to women whose lives were shaped by their personal experiences as mothers. In order to prove her claim, Fischer examines Addams’s career and rhetoric before WWI. I found this article through a search of the MLA database, and I know this article is scholarly because it appeared in a peer-reviewed journal published by Johns Hopkins University Press. Additionally, Fischer is a philosophy professor of at the University of Dayton. I’m not sure yet whether I agree with Fischer, but this article will help me understand how Addams’s anti-war rhetoric is connected to the rest of her career as a social reformer, so I can flesh out the "politics" section of hr article effectively.

Peer Review Instructions

 * 1) Add Dr. Bauer's User Talk page (this page) to your Watchlist by clicking the star in the upper right corner (next to "View History." This way you can quickly find your way back to this page as you work and in the future.
 * 2) Navigate to your peer’s User Talk page by typing “User Talk:[Their User name]” in the search field.
 * 3) Add their page to your Watchlist, as well.
 * 4) On your partner’s User Talk page, add a new section Header titled “Peer Feedback.” Type your feedback, based on the prompts below, to that section.
 * 5) Don't forget to sign your comments (using the signature/timestamp markup), and summarize the changes you made at the bottom of the page!
 * 6) Discuss your findings with your partner
 * 7) Over the next 24 hours, revise your list of contribution based on peer feedback and reflection. Dr. Bauer will grade your revised list next week. You will not receive credit for a revised list if you did not have a draft list in class today, however.

Peer Review Questions
Don’t forget to sign your feedback and summarize your edits when you are done! Nadinecross78 (talk) 16:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Appearance: Does your partner seem to have a good grasp of how to post content on Wikipedia? Are topic headings, bullet points, and other appearance basics used correctly? Are the proposed edits on the User Talk page? Are all proposed edits to existing articles internally linked? Suggest areas for corrections or improvements.
 * Neutrality: Do the proposed edits meet Wikipedia neutrality guidelines? Does it look like the student wants to include original research? If so, note possible neutrality problems here.
 * Notability: Do the proposed edits meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines? Why or why not?
 * Redundancy: Do some searching on Wikipedia. Are the suggested edits actually already done somewhere else on Wikipedia, perhaps under a slightly different title? This is especially important if your peer is proposing to add an entirely new article.
 * Relevance: Are the edits really concerned with American literature, or are they concerned with politics, history or some other subject? If relevance is a potential problem, how and where might your peer add content that would connect their interests with the study of American literature?
 * Focus: Look for vague language in the proposed edits. Where do the proposed edits say things like “I will fix this” or “I will re-organize this” without explaining how or what they will fix or re-organize? Ask your partner to clarify anything that seems vague.