User talk:Sfast1/Digital Divide in Colombia

Group Comments for the Draft

While I see that you have a section marked "Outline," I notice that there really is not much there. This is going to be very difficult as you work on your first rough draft this week. You will need to work on your lead, your rough draft of each section, and your sources list by the end of the week. You will need to make sure that each section focuses on the digital divide in Colombia. Please email Dr. Benoit or myself if you have any questions.

Mmaggi9 (talk) 02:02, 17 October 2017 (UTC) Melanie Maggio: TA for LIS 2000

Group Comments for the Draft It looks like only one user has added anything to your group page. I responded to your email from last night, and will reach out to your other group members. Eabenoit (talk) 14:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)eabenoit

Prynceston Peer Review
Great job stating the usage of internet among users in columbia, but add in the definition of ICT just to make sure the audience understands the information completely. Also confirming who controls the digital divide and who suffers from its effects would also help. Source's were used well and cited correctly. You did a good job on the perspective part of the information and making sure it's varied, but could go into more depth for some of the topics. Overall, it was good information.

The beginning of the article is very well thought out. You have very good start. I think you need to explain this point, "There is a difference in those who go online just for fun and those who use the internet for the improvement of themselves.", this can be expanded into an entire section. This article isn't complete by every person in the group and it is a team assignment. Once every one completes their section of the article it will become an article actually used for information. There is very good information but it just has to be expanded on. I am interested to learn about the digital divide in Colombia and when the article is complete I hope this is a good source of information. Andrea Panaitescu

peer review summary commentary sandi nguyen- Thank you everyone for your feedback, we appreciate the criticism and know that we have a lot of work to do as our group does not communicate well. Some of us have got together to figure out how to put the sections and how to organize them, and soon the draft will be more presentable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandiyenguyen (talk • contribs) 20:20, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review
Great job on improving what was already there. I feel that the ICT and Government Environment sections are pretty well developed. As for the physical access portion, it needs a lot of work. There isn't much for the reader to go off of because there is only one line of content. Maybe you can find some statistics as to what percent of Columbia had and didn't have physical access to internet throughout the last 5-10 years. You can probably pull it together to show the progress Columbia has made to close the digital divide. Good job guys!

- Shelby McDonald — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shelbykatelyn95 (talk • contribs) 00:01, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review response by: Morgan Goree
Thank you for your feedback! Our group sincerely appreciates the suggestions and criticism. Our group certainly has a lot of work to do with this article. As you pointed out, many of our sections are not filled with enough polished, informative content. We will be sure to begin to coordinate with one another and figure out exactly who is responsible for information in each section. We will likely begin with the physical access portion that as is, as you stated, obviously deficient in content. Right now, our group certainly has communication issues, but once we all get on the same page it should be easy to implement the suggestions you made! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoree5 (talk • contribs) 22:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

==peer review response: Prynceston Fant Thanks for the constructive criticism. The suggestions made by you were made clearly and very helpful. As a group, we understand we need to tie all of our information up better and in a more extensive way. The statement made about showing the progress of the digital divide in Columbia is spot on and we will do research in regards to that. Your feedback will be taken into serious consideration and I feel it will ultimately culminate our article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.180.108.175 (talk) 02:31, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Moved to userspace
Hi, , , , I've moved this back to the userspace so you can work on this. The article isn't yet ready to be moved live, as it has some issues with this that need to be resolved first.


 * One of the main issues is that this feels more like a persuasive or academic essay, as it doesn't really fit into Wikipedia's writing style. Basically, it feels more like it was written by one person and the sections don't really seem to flow together.


 * The article needs more sourcing, as some portions are completely unsourced. Something to be careful about is the use of studies, as studies themselves are viewed as primary sources on Wikipedia since they're primary sources for the conclusions and research the authors created. This means that all studies should be backed up by a secondary source that covers the study in-depth, as this will justify mentioning the study in the article.


 * The article should not have your names on the sections you created.

At the moment I'm leaning towards creating a list page that will have summaries of the digital divide in various countries, as it may be better to have a shorter summary in a list page than an independent article. I'll update you on this if I create this. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:57, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I've started this at User:Tokyogirl79/List of countries and the digital divide if you want to merge some information there. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:14, 14 November 2017 (UTC)