User talk:Owenspg

Welcome!
Hello, Owenspg, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place  on this page and someone will drop by to help. I work with the Wiki Education Foundation, and help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment. If there's anything I can do to help with your assignment (or, for that matter, any other aspect of Wikipedia) please feel free to drop me a note. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:42, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Your first article
 * Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
 * And feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

Hey Pam!

 * Why was the bad baseball team hot? They had no fans! Smkaspr14 (talk) 02:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)smkaspr14
 * What did the pirate say when he turned 80? Aye matey! Owenspg (talk) 02:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * What did the fish say when he hit a wall? Dam! Smkaspr14 (talk) 02:16, 8 April 2015 (UTC)smkaspr14
 * Did you hear the rumor going around about butter? Never mind, I shouldn't spread it! Owenspg (talk) 02:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Hey guys, don't know exactly who I am corresponding with. I just see Pam. So hey Pam. --Tcm2015 (talk) 03:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
Hey just saying hello.

Tcm2015 (talk) 03:32, 8 April 2015 (UTC) 

How do I add a lovely picture?Crimson1991 (talk) 15:59, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi
Just saying hi --Tcm2015 (talk) 03:35, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Summary of characteristic of target article
For our article, our goal is for it to be labeled as either a B or GA quality article. In order for my article to be labeled as a B class article, if must be nearly finished and free from any serious issues. Meaning, there should be plenty of reliable references and in-line citations, as well as good images, organized sections, and important information. In order for our article to reach GA quality, it must be better written and better cited than a B class article, and follows the five pillars of Wikipedia more closely.

Peer Review #1
Hey Pam! I have finally gotten a chance to read of what you have started on your wikipedia page. Below is the feedback that I have on what you have done so far.

Does the lead section follow Style Guidelines?-- Generally yes. Great information, but need to remember this is to general population, not just scientists (they don't know what Rhinovirus is) Does the content accurately represent the cited sources?-- Great citations so far!! I would link some wiki sites though, especially with scientific terms Is the writing clear, comprehensible, and doesn't use too much jargon?-- There isn't too much jargon, but some could be "dumbed down" a little. Do the contents of each section belong in that section? In other words, is each section coherent, and in concord with the section heading?-- YEP!! The headers are very clear as to what content will be covered. Are there gaps in the content? (What is missing?)-- For a start to a page, this is looking good. I would make sure to put the article titles she has been an author of as well, not just what the article was about. Are there places where there is ambiguity or inaccuracy over which sources are supporting what content?-- Not that I noticed Could the content be structured differently? You could suggest alterations in the order of sentences, paragraphs or sections for organizational purposes.-- Generally it is good. Just remember that this is something everyone (non-scientists) can see. Are there parts of the article that are not clearly explained, and could cause questions to arise in the mind of a reader?-- No, not really, just the minimal amounts of jargon Is the content within Wikipedia's guidelines (such as neutral point of view) and does it avoid plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing?-- Yes! It is well written, neutral and there are not red flags for plagiarism.

For that start of an article, this is looking really good. Just remember that we do have to have a picture of some sort with the little talk box. Hope this has been helpful as you shape up the rest of the article! Lelisabeth89 (talk) 00:39, 10 May 2015 (UTC)