User talk:Shalor (Wiki Ed)/Archive 7

Need help request from Ladaggs33 (talk)
Hello.

I need help with... my sandbox draft on Audre Lorde's contributions to the Third World feminist discourse. Here is my draft.

Hello.

I need help with... I am ready to transfer the information about Audre Lorde and her contributions to the Third World feminist discourse.

Contributions to the Third World Feminist Discourse Around the 1960s, second-wave feminist discourse became centered around discussions and debates about capitalism was a “biased, discriminatory, and unfair” institution, especially within the context of the rise of globalization in the coming decades. The third wave emerged in the 1990s after calls for “a more differentiated feminism” by first world women of color and third world women, such as Audre Lorde, who maintained their critiques of first world feminism for tending to veer toward “third world homogenization.” This term was coined by radical dependency theorist, Andre Gunder Frank, to describe the inconsideration of the unique histories of third world countries (in the process of forming development agendas) (McMichael, ). Audre Lorde was critical of the first world feminist movement “for downplaying sexual, racial, and class differences” (Peet and Hartwick, 161) and the unique power structures and cultural factors which vary by region, nation, community, etc. Other women of this period echoed Lorde’s sentiments. Collectively they called for a “feminist politics of location, which theorized that women were subject to particular assemblies of oppression, and therefore that all women emerged with particular rather than generic identities” (Peet and Hartwick, 164). While they encouraged a global community of women, Audre Lorde, in particular, felt the homogenization of third world women could only lead to a disguised form of oppression with its own forms of othering third world women into figures of deviance and non-actors in theories of their own development. Audre Lorde cautioned against the “institutionalized rejection of difference” in her essay, “Age, Race, Class, and Sex: Women Redefining Difference,” fearing that when “...we do not develop tools for using human difference as a springboard for creative change within our lives [,] we speak not of human difference, but of human deviance”(Lorde, 116). Lorde saw this already happening with the lack of inclusion of literature from women of color in the second wave feminist discourse. She found that “the literature of women of Color [was] seldom included in women’s literature courses and almost never in other literature courses, nor in women’s studies as a whole” and pointed to the “othering” of women of color and Third World reason as the reason. By homogenizing these communities and ignoring their difference, “...women of Color become ‘other,’ the outside whose experiences and tradition is too ‘alien’ to comprehend” (Lorde, 117 ), and thus, prevailingly unworthy of scholarly attention and differentiated scholarship. Audre Lorde called for the embracing of these differences, rather than the ignoring of them. In the same essay, she proclaimed, “now we must recognize difference among women who are our equals, neither inferior nor superior, and devise ways to use each others’ difference to enrich our visions and our joint struggles” (Lorde, 122). Doing so would lead to more inclusive and thus, more effective global feminist goals. Lorde theorized that true development in Third World communities would and even “the future of our earth may depend upon the ability of all women to identify and develop new definitions of power and new patterns of relating across differences” (Lorde, 123). In other words, the individual voices and concerns of women and color and Third World women would be the first step in attaining the autonomy with the potential to develop and transform their communities effectively in the age (and future) of globalization. In a keynote speech at the National Third World Gay and Lesbian Conference on October 13th, 1979 titled, “When will the ignorance end?” Lorde reminded and cautioned the attendees’ “There is a wonderful diversity of groups within this conference, and a wonderful diversity between us within those groups. That diversity can be a generative force, a source of energy fueling our visions of action for the future. We must not let diversity be used to tear us apart from each other, nor from our communities that is the mistake they made about us. I do not want us to make it ourselves….and we must never forget those lessons: that we cannot separate our oppressions, nor yet are they the same” McMichael, Phillip. Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective. 4thth ed., Thousand Oaks, California, Pine Forge Press, 2008. (Byrd, Cole, Guy-Sheftall, 209). In other words, while common experiences in racism, sexism, and homophobia had brought the group together and that commonality could not be ignored, there must still be a recognition of their individualized humanity. Years later, on August 27th, 1983, Audre Lorde delivered an address from the “litany of commitment” at the March on Washington. “Today we march,” she said, “lesbians and gay men and our children, standing in our own names together with all our struggling sisters and brothers here and around the world, in the Middle East, in Central America, in the Caribbean and South Africa, sharing our commitment to work for a joint livable future. We know we do not have to become copies of each other in order to be able to work together. We know that when we join hands across the table of our difference, our diversity gives us great power. When we can arm ourselves with the strength and vision from all of our diverse communities, then we will in truth all be free at last” (Byrd, Cole, Guy-Sheftall, 212). Afro-German feminist scholar and author, Dr. Marian Kraft interviewed Audre Lorde in 1986 to discuss a number of her literary works and poems. In this interview, Audre Lorde articulated hope for the next wave of feminist scholarship and discourse. When asked by Miriam Kraft, “Do you see any development of the awareness about the importance of differences within the white feminist movement?” Lorde replied with both critiques and hope; “Well, the feminist movement, the white feminist movement, has been notoriously slow to recognize that racism is a feminist concern, not one that is altruistic, but one that is part and parcel of feminist consciousness.. I think, in fact, though, that things are slowing changing and that there are white women now who recognize that in the interest of genuine coalition, they must see that we are not the same. Black feminism is not white feminism in Blackface. It is an intricate movement coming out of the lives, aspirations, and realities of Black women. We share somethings with white women, and there are other things we do not share. We must be able to come together around those things we share” (Broeck, Bolaki, 50). Dr. Miriam Kraft summarized Lorde’s position when reflecting on the interview; “Yes, we have different historical, social, and cultural backgrounds, different sexual orientations; different aspirations and visions; different skin colors and ages. But we share common experiences and a common goal. Our experiences are rooted in the oppressive forces of racism in various societies, and our goal is our mutual concern to work toward ‘a future which has not yet been’ in Audre’s words” (Broeck, Bolaki, 45).

Sources Broeck, Sabine, and Stella Bolaski. Audre Lorde's Transnational Legacies. Boston, University of Massachusetts Press, 2015, pp. 45-50.

Lorde, Audre. "I Am Your Sister: Collected and Unpublished Writings of Audre Lorde." I Am Your Sister: Collected and Unpublished Writings of Audre Lorde, edited by Rudolph P. Byrd, Johnetta B. Col, and Beverly Guy-Sheftall, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 209-12.

Hartwick, Elaine, and Richard Peet. Theories of Development: Contentions, Arguments, Alternatives. 2ndnd ed., New York City, Guilford Press, 1999, pp. 161-72.

Lorde, Audre. Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches by Audre Lorde. Berkeley, Crossing Press, 1984, pp. 116-23.

McMichael, Phillip. Development and Social Change: A Global Perspective. 4thth ed., Thousand Oaks, California, Pine Forge Press, 2008.

--Ladaggs33 (talk) 06:49, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

--Ladaggs33 (talk) 06:49, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, can you break this into paragraphs? It's a little hard to read in one large chunk like this. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:07, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Cori83 (talk)
Hello.

I need help with removing a "user sandbox" label in the legacy section of Ibn Khaldun's page. This label appears even when I access the page while logged out of Wikipedia, so I'm fairly sure it's not specific to my account and is on the main Ibn Khaldun page. I can't find any indications of it while editing the section to remove it.

--Cori83 (talk) 04:23, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've removed it for you! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:09, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Rowecaitlin (talk)
Hello!

I'm trying to publish this article, and I'm having a great deal of trouble. I've review every piece of writing on this topic provided by Wikipedia, and I'm still unable to find out what I'm doing wrong. I'd love your expert advice!

--Rowecaitlin (talk) 13:29, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ! The draft looks to have been moved - the article looks good, so my only note would be to add more sourcing if possible. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Brittanyweis (talk)
Hello.

I need help with... I have an assignment for a University course that is drafting an edit to the A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man Wikipedia article with a partner. We have just completed our first draft under the "Themes" and "Reception" section and were hoping to get some feedback on what to change before we attempt to move it over to Wikipedia.

--Brittanyweis (talk) 17:13, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think that this is good so far - my main note is that you need to make sure to attribute claims to specific scholars in order to show that it isn't your own original research. (IE, that you're summarizing someone else's interpretation of the material rather than writing out your own interpretations.) I've added some attribution to the draft as an example of how it can show up. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Amandav05 (talk) 17:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Hello. I have added three addition sources to the article Zero (Spanish magazine). I am wondering if it is appropriate for me to remove the template that says additional citations for verification are required. There is no one else currently working on the page so I cannot go to the talk page for consensus. Thank you. Amandav05 (talk) 17:54, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ! As long as all of the major claims in the article are sourced, I don't see why not. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:08, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Ed/Arkansas State University/ENG3053 Digital Writing (Spring 2018)
Have you seen the list of articles? It is, in general, a horrible list that resembles a spammer's client roster, and it even includes a vanity bio already deleted at AFD. How were these subjects chosen? --Calton | Talk 00:09, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi - I'm definitely looking into this course and will ask the instructor about how the article choices were chosen. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from 688GlRv (talk)
Hello.

I need help with citing a book chapter in an anthology.

Here's an example when I tried: Coughlan, J. Michelle (2012). "Absolutely Punk: Queer Economies of Desire in Tarzan of the Apes". In Churchwell, Sarah. Must Read: Rediscovering American Bestsellers: From Charlotte Temple to The DaVinci Code. London, England: Continuum. p. 187. ISBN 978-1441162168.

It does not recognize the editor.

How can I correctly cite an article from a book on Wikipedia?

Thank you.

--688GlRv (talk) 20:03, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, you can always add the citation by adding to each end of the citation so that it looks like this:
 * It doesn't absolutely have to be in the template format - it just has to have the basic information about what you're using in the source. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It doesn't absolutely have to be in the template format - it just has to have the basic information about what you're using in the source. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Kassidy Veasaw (talk)
Hello.

I need help with...

Uploading a picture that I created myself in paint. I named the file correctly, and checked the "this is my own work" but wiki will not let me upload my picture. It says the media file cannot be uploaded.

--Kassidy Veasaw (talk) 20:35, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, are you trying to upload it via VisualEditor? If so, then VisualEditor will often have issues with uploading content so it's better to upload it via Wikimedia Commons. Our module on uploading images and media will give a good overview of the process as well as some of the general guidelines. On a side note, is the Content Expert for your course, so he's the main person you should turn to with any questions. This one was an easy one, but with more science oriented questions he's the man in the know. :) Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:09, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Ed/Rutgers/Languages in Peril (Spring) ‎
I'd also like to draw your attention to this issue. --Calton | Talk 00:11, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi - I just posted to the student's talk page. I'm sorry that you've run into this and I (along with the professor) will definitely work with them so this doesn't continue. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Ed/Boise State University/English 102 sec 019 (Spring 2018)
These editors have been instructed in basic article content expectations? --Neil N  talk to me 22:03, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Happened again. Vermont (talk) 00:10, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


 * We've given them some training modules, but I'll reach out to the instructor about this. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:52, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Jasmine.tsui (talk)
Hi Shalor!

I recently edited the Employment Discrimination page as part of a class project and noticed that all my edits have been erased after a week or so. I was wondering if you could help me figure out why and get my edits back so my professor can grade my work. Thank you, Jasmine

--Jasmine.tsui (talk) 18:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll reply on your talk page! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Need Help Request for Jasmine cont.
Thanks for the quick response Shalor! I was wondering if there was an easy way to get the edits back without individually adding each one because I made quite a lot. I saw there was an undo button but I didn't want to make any drastic edits like the other student did so I wanted your help. Is there anyway to revert the page back to when my edits were posted and have the student who copied and pasted the old article with his edits reedit the page properly? Here is what the page used to look like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_discrimination?oldid=838063113 It is not only my additions and edits but the entire By Region section(which I made some edits in) that is also deleted. Jasmine.tsui (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, someone has reverted the student's edits so your edits should once again be visible. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:37, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Two articles, same subject: Alma Dea Morani and Alma Dea Morani
Hi Shalor, Articles about the same person - Alma Dea Morani - have been created in a WikiEd project under two different spellings: The incorrect spelling was the article created first. I am aware that here is a process to remedy this. Could you possibly look into this? Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:22, 4 May 2018 (UTC) Shhh, TYG79, this is just between you and me, OK? While we both have teh admin buttons, I quite frankly have somewhere between "no clue at all" and "almost no clue at at all" about how to do this sort of technical stuff. Please don't tell anyone else I said this!
 * Alma Dea Morani on 21:16, April 27, 2018 UTC
 * Alma Dia Morani on 22:44, April 26, 2018 UTC
 * - no worries! I know how to merge things, but heaven help me if I have to un-merge them! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:51, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Pierre Bourdieu
Hi! I have added to Bourdieu's page some additional information about his views on social capital in the section Species of Capital and Symbolic Violence. Is there anything I can do further to improve the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sk2266 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'll reply on your talk page! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:32, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Restoring User:ToriNaz3's contribution to her userspace
Hi Shalor, I'd very much like to take a look at ToriNaz3's page for grading purposes, but it has been completely deleted. Chuck Haberl (talk) 22:16, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Just for reference, the page is History of Maori Language and the deleting administrator was.
 * Also, just would like to make a general suggestion. I think it's great the teachers try to incorporate Wikipedia into their classes in various ways; however, I think if teachers are going to be grading their student's work, then they should be instructing their students to not try and add their work to the article namespace until it has been graded. Technically, any page on Wikipedia can be edited by anyone at anytime, but most experienced editors will leave sandboxes, userspace drafts and drafts alone unless there are some serious issues which need immediate attention (e.g., WP:COPY or WP:BLP violations) or they are asked to help in some way. These same editors will, on the other hand, have no qualms about going in an cleaning up articles if they think relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines are not being followed. They will not wait to be asked and they most likely don't care who's being graded. A student might wake up one morning to find their "work" completely changed or deleted, which is something that lots of editors have a little difficulty grasping at first. At the same time, the teacher might be grading something which may not truly reflect the student's work, for better or worse. Maybe some teachers know enough to check edit histories to actually see which edits were made by their students, but I'd guess that such teachers are probably in the minority. If for some reason part of the student's grade is based upon whether they can "publish" an article in Wikipedia, then they should be advised to submit them via WP:AfC and not just rely on "peer reviews" from their fellow classmates. AfC reviewers tend to have lots of experience creating/review articles and generally don't accept drafts that are likely to be quickly deleted. AfC reviewers also usually provide specific reasons why drafts are declined and offer suggestions or advice on how to improve things. It's not a perfect system for sure, but it tends to eliminate articles being speedily deleted for reasons such as WP:ACSD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:59, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your advice. Shalor is the WikiEdu liaison for the course. If you had checked the talk page of the student in question, you would have seen that she asked the student to comment on her Talk page if she wanted the page to be restored to her userspace. Unfortunately, I have to submit grades immediately and do not have the luxury of time.
 * If you're not familiar with WikiEdu, the students enroll in a dashboard and participate in a series of training modules before the final stage in which they move their articles into mainspace. Students learn at different paces, however, and unfortunately not all of the lessons "take." When mistakes happen, it naturally reflects poorly on the instructor and the school, perhaps more than the student herself, and for that reason I'm growing more skeptical of the use of Wikipedia in the classroom. I've been doing this for 3 years, and despite the wonderful support from WikiEdu, it hasn't always been 100% successful, to put it mildly. Chuck Haberl (talk) 00:57, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I saw the posts on the student's user talk page. I simply added the link and a ping to RHaworth, just to make him aware of your post here. If, however, you're really pressed for time, then you might try posting on User talk:RHaworth and directly asking him to userfy the deleted the content. You can also ask for help at WP:REFUND. There's no guarantee, but requests such as these tend to be granted as long as there are no major problems, such as WP:COPYVIO or WP:BLP, with the content. Try to remember that adminsitrators like everyone else occasionally get WP:BUSY, so please be patient if you don't get an immediate response. Maybe the student could, in the meantime, try and recreate the deleted content in their user sandbox.
 * As for your experiences with Wiki Ed, it's unfortunate that some have not been positive. I not a liason like Shalor, but I've come across quite a number of articles created by students in the past which have had problems. Mistakes are expected on Wikipedia, especially from new editors who might be unfamilair with all of the various policies and guidelines; so, I don't think most editors are going to think badly of the students, their instructors, or their schools as long as the mistakes are made in good faith and don't start to become disruptive. I do think though that the pressure of being graded and due dates might be a reason why many students seem to be in a rush to add their work to the mainspace, but Wikipedia usually doesn't follow deadlines established by outside third parties. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:19, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Hmckeough (talk)
Hello.

I need help with... figuring out how to insert headers and content boxes. Thank you.

Hadyn McKeough

--Hmckeough (talk) 21:54, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Shalor,

I am having trouble inserting headers and a content box. Any advice?

Thank You,

Hadyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hmckeough (talk • contribs) 21:55, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ! Are you using Visual Editor? It's generally easier to edit with this format and you can enable it by following the directions here. You can add headers into the article by styling it like this: ==Header==. I do have some notes, though, which I'll leave on your talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from NaetteYokoLee (talk)
Hello.

I need help with...

reviewing to make sure my sources and text are appropriate.

--NaetteYokoLee (talk) 02:26, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, your draft looks good - my only note is about the image. It needs more information about the source, so that people can verify that the image is held under a compatible license to Wikipedia. The main issue with images is that most are held under a license that doesn't allow it to be posted to Wikipedia. If you want, I can definitely help with this. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:41, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Laura.smith450 (talk)
Hello.

I need help with reviewing my sandbox section titled Article Rough Draft. We will be working on peer reviews this week as well. I am working on my bibliography section and is still in need of much improvement.

Thanks for all of your help.

--Laura.smith450 (talk) 16:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'll reply on your talk page! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:00, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Image
Hi Shalor,

I received the image from the playwright that wrote and directed the production Gene Miles - the Woman of the World. His name is Tony Hall. I know the source of the image as well. It was taken by a stylist the worked with her in the 60s. He has given permission for the photo to be used in promotional materials about Gene Miles. IT was used on the program and collateral for the play. Would it help if I got a release from either of these gentlemen? Tell me what you think is the best way to go about it.

This is for the class assignment, however, it is a very important article to Trinidad and Tobago and I am committed to working on it after the end of the semester as more documentation comes to light.

Please let me know how I should proceed.

Thanks for the assistance.

n.y. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaetteYokoLee (talk • contribs) 17:06, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, they would have to file the permission themselves, since it would essentially mean that they are donating the image to Wikipedia. Since they use this for promotional purposes, they may not want to do this since donating would allow anyone to edit and re-use the image, even for their own commercial reasons. If they're OK with this, they can use this to donate the image. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:08, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Supplementary question
Hi Shalor,

sorry to inundate you but there is one other thing. One of the key elements of the Gene Miles story is missing. She is said to have had an affair with a senior government official that may have contributed to the victimisation she faced after the Commission. It is mentioned in more than one of the sources since the individual in question was at the heart of another corruption scandal.

http://www.guardian.co.tt/archives/news/politics/2010/03/14/o-halloran-s-ghost-haunts-pnm

http://star.worldbank.org/corruption-cases/node/18517

Anyone who is familiar with the story will know it is missing from the text. I was concerned about presenting the allegation because, even though it appears in the editorials, the play and one of the book-length accounts, it does not appear in official documents.

Do you have a sense of how I should treat this particular issue? I am careful to use my own words but I am not sure how I can make sense of it without a direct quotation from the source.

Thanks for your help,

n.y.
 * Hi - no problem, ask as many questions as you wish - it's what I'm here for! As far as the allegations go, that's a little tricky. It's unlikely to be confirmed by an official source given the type of allegation, so it has to be approached carefully. I would mention it in a single sentence, like this:
 * ''According to Raffique Shah, Miles had been conducting an affair with a senior government official, stating that "not even her relationship with the notorious John O'Halloran could save her from the might of the PNM" and that she died "a virtual vagrant, pauperised and made an outcast by the same Williams who had attacked corruption with full force-before he came to power!".


 * This will attribute the claim to a specific person, so that it presents it as less of an absolute fact, so to speak. If you wanted to tie this to the abuse, you'd have to find a source that specifically makes that claim. It has to be very carefully stated and the source has to be verifiable. Word of mouth (or email) isn't something that would suffice on Wikipedia, especially with this claim. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:08, 8 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, just a follow-up comment: there are two aspects of Wikipedia's core neutral point of view policy that apply here:
 * Avoid stating opinions as facts (and vice versa) &mdash; opinions should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice, but attributed to their author.
 * The principle of due weight recommends devoting proportionately less text to opinions held by a minority.
 * What this means, is, when something is pretty much universally accepted, you just say it, in Wikipedia's voice: The Earth revolves around the sun., not: Galileo says, "The Earth revolves around the sun." When something is more of an allegation or a minority opinion, you need to attribute it, either in reported speech: Johnson said that the Sun goes around the Earth. or by using quotation marks.  When deciding how much to say about an allegation or minority view, keep due weight in mind, and be sure that you attribute it with citations to reliable sources.  HTH, Mathglot (talk) 20:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks ! This is incredibly useful and definitely good advice for something like this! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:18, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Amitc008 (talk)
Hello Shalor,

I put a picture up for the article on "Emotional Intelligence", and it was uploaded. However within 10 minutes it was gone. For some reason when I try to re-upload it, the webpage is telling me that my image is a duplicate of a picture already posted for the page. But, the image is not there, so I am confused. Anyway, maybe i'm just not seeing the image because i'm the author. Can you let me know what's going on.

Thanks a bunch,

--Amitc008 (talk) 00:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, it looks like it was removed by with the argument that it wasn't relevant to the article. Offhand I can see his point - it's a nice picture to be sure, but it isn't really clear how it pertains to emotional intelligence. It shows a man in thought, but being in thought doesn't automatically connect it to emotional intelligence. A caption may help with this, as could editing the image to add in something that more clearly links it to emotional intelligence. Things like this do tend to be kind of hard to capture without making an image relatively complicated, as the idea of what emotional intelligence should look like is a little esoteric and vague. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:49, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from 68.113.163.239 (talk)
Hello.

Thank you for your response. What about an image of the same person expression themselves through their face?

--68.113.163.239 (talk) 14:06, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It might, but I'm just concerned that it still may not be clear enough - I really think that it would be good to accompany it with a quote that helps clarify how it relates. Also, make sure that you are always signed in when you edit. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:49, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Shalor, why is your response here, not "In Wikipedia, when there are disagreements, you should follow WP:BRD and open a discussion on the talk page about the image."? Jytdog (talk) 15:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I didn't know if adding a quote here would be enough or if it whole heartedly needed a discussion - I thought that if the vagueness was dealt with, that would be enough. But if you do think that a discussion would be best here, then it would be good to open one. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:13, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Amitc008 (talk)
Hi Shalor

I am requesting that you allow my image to be on the article for emotional intelligence. Aside from working very hard on it for a project, there are a couple reasons as to why I feel this image should be allowed.

1. The person who took my image off did not think well enough into their reasoning. Emotional Intelligence is the ability to recognize, understand, and manage one's emotions and the emotions of others. This picture is clearly an image of someone in thought.

2. Thoughtful is an emotion, and that is exactly what this person is doing. Here is a link to the many emotions we are capable of, and "Thoughtful" is on the list. There are many other sources that would agree.

3. This image goes with my argument: Since Emotional Intelligence (EI) was my main focus for the entire college semester (Kirsten Isgro's Communication & Culture course), I analyzed this concept thoroughly. This Wikipedia article is lacking an important aspect which is activism. The entire article is about the history of EI and what it is today. However, it says nothing about what people have done (or can do) to give people an idea as to how they can actually utilize EI as a skill. Here is a link to a scholarly journal about EI in organizations.

4. I am a women. It may seem ridiculous, but after reading about the gender gap in Wikipedia, I feel that my opinion should be emphasized, in order to increase the amount of female contributors. It truly discourages me seeing that it was so easy for someone to take off a meaningful picture.

Please get back to me with any questions, comments, or concerns. And thank you for reading.

--Amitc008 (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, at this point this is something that you will need to discuss on the article's talk page - it's not up to me as the Content Expert to make the choice. When you post to the talk page, two things that I do want to caution you against would be statements that the other editor did not put enough thought into their removal or that your edits should hold more weight because you're female - both of these are things that can actually harm rather than help your argument.
 * I think that there are two different things that you could do in this situation:
 * The first is to discuss re-adding the image with a caption showing how the image relates to the article. The main issue Jytdog had with the image was that it wasn't really clear how the image related to the article, which is a valid concern - for example, while it may be clear to some people it may not be clear to all people and may be confusing. A caption will help with this, as it will explain how the image relates to emotional intelligence. I've given an example of such a caption here - it's a sentence taken from the article that deals with thought. Something I do have to caution you on as far as sourcing goes is that the one you give here for thoughtfulness isn't something that would be seen as reliable source on Wikipedia - scholarly and academic sourcing would be what you'd want for something like this.
 * Take a new photograph. It may be easier to take a new photograph that would more clearly show some of the aspects of emotional intelligence, such as two people talking and interacting. To help address the gender gap, you could have the photo be of two women. Since one of the things that you want to edit about is activism, you could add in aspects of this - maybe have the two women talking while holding a brochure or poster about emotional intelligence?
 * I hope that this helps - again, it's not that I don't want you to add it - it's more that at this point this is something that needs to be discussed on the article's talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:17, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Conradbaer (talk)
Hello.

I need help with...

Move the article to public post. It refused allow me because it says Deaf Gain wikipedia article is already existed. Can you help me solve this? Thanks!

--Conradbaer (talk) 15:56, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
 * , I'll respond on your talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:18, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Amitc008 (talk)
Hello.

I put an entirely new picture up and it was ALREADY taken off.... I don't know how to check why or who did it. I am getting aggravated.

--Amitc008 (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've opened up a discussion on the talk page about this, asking for their input and advice on how to include the images in the article. I wouldn't add anything else to the article image-wise for now. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:35, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Image Permission
Hi Shalor,

sorry to be a bother. I've been granted permission by a newspaper editor to use three images of Gene Miles. I am trying to find the simplest way to upload them and use the permission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NaetteYokoLee (talk • contribs) 14:56, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi - the best/easiest way would be to get them to upload the images themselves, as legally Wikipedia can't do anything with the images unless the copyright holders file permission, which essentially means them releasing it under a Creative Commons license. Even then, it's not as easy as them saying that something can only be used on Wikipedia, as uploading means that the images will be donated to Wikipedia. This in turn means that anyone can use the images for anything, even for commercial purposes. Some places don't really want to do this since they want to protect their copyright for commercial reasons, because they want to protect the image from being used in a way they don't like, or both. If they're OK with this, they can upload it by following the directions here. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 01:49, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Zorolee1997 (talk)
Hello.

I need help with...

For the past few months, I have been learning about building a Wikipedia web page on my own and now I would like to ask some suggestion for fixing my article or any mistake that I can revise.

--Zorolee1997 (talk) 05:27, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'll respond on your talk page! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Umi Santillan (talk)
Hello.

I need help with...

copy editing

--Umi Santillan (talk) 05:05, 29 May 2018 (UTC) Umi Santillan
 * Hi, I've done a little editing with my main account to the lead. I've shortened it a little since leads are supposed to be a general overview of the article and moved part of it into its own section titled purpose.
 * I think that the neutrality concern can be resolved via attribution such as "according to...". I'll post more to your talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:50, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Helping correcting spelling error?
Hello Shalor,

I am hoping to write you a long thank-you note soon for your help with my class this last spring. This is sadly, and somewhat rudely, this note is not that overdue one. I just wanted to quickly follow up on the comment @PamD wrote to @Alliemallie in which it was noted that the word "college" was misspelled in the title of the course. See: https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/courses/Mills_Collage/The_Queer_Encyclopedia_(Spring_2018) I had totally missed that error! I agree it looks very bad. I know the course is archived now, however, I wonder if there is a way to correct that? I tried doing it on my own but could not. I am happy to do it if you could tell me how. Thanks.
 * We can, but it would change the URL for the course - of course this wouldn't be as major of an issue now that the class is over. Let me ask if I can fix this. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:34, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm interested in helping student editors
I've had positive experiences with Wiki Ed before, and I really like the idea and concepts of the program, so I think I want to help out wherever I can. Unfortunately, there wasn't even an "About" section on Wiki Ed's website - so I figured I'd ask you(r Wiki Ed alter ego). How can I, as an experienced editor, help out with Wiki Ed courses?

P.S. not really expecting much beyond "offer advice," which is actually totally fine with me. – Vami _IV✠  03:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll definitely mention that you want to help out to my colleagues! Offhand the best thing is to offer advice, as you suggested above - this is something that's invaluable as far as teaching goes, as students have a lot of questions. :) Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:45, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Hemoglobin
Hey so, you kind of screwed up the hemoglobin page when you tried to fix or add a citation, and you deleted the entire infobox and put the citation at the very top of the page. I know we all make mistakes, but please just preview your changes next time my friend, thanks (no hard feelings, sorry if I come off rude, it is not my intention)

Oh yeah and no worries it's fixed now! Acolossus &#124; Talk &#124; Contributions 22:56, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Shoot - that was definitely an accident! I was in VisualEditor and it must have been a glitch or something. I'm a little embarrassed! Thanks for fixing it, ! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 01:14, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * no need to be embarassed, you edit a lot lot more than me so it's understandable sometimes things slip through, thank you for all your hard work! Acolossus &#124; Talk &#124; Contributions 17:26, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Students clueless about article titles
Hallo Shalor, I've come across Jamie A. Thomas (Anthropologist) (from the Blacklivesmatter course) which has two problems with the article title: the disambiguation shouldn't have a capital "A", and isn't needed anyway as there is no other Jamie A. Thomas. I'm pretty sure I've come across at least one other "(Anthropologist)" in last day or two so it looks as if this whole course-load of students don't know how to choose a title. Perhaps you could nudge the instructors? I haven't moved this one because it's at AfD and moving articles which are at AfD seems to be fraught with problems! Pam D  17:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ! The class is ending this week, but I'll definitely reach out to the instructor about this. I know that some of the articles do have other issues as well, so I'll include this also. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, would you have any issue with me moving Nicole Truesdell to the userspace? (Specifically that of the student who created the article.) I want to give them more time to find sourcing and would've moved it, except that I see that you've done some editing. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:28, 13 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Not a problem. I remember cleaning up the Truesdell piece and feeling irritated that the student had been taught so badly, with all the weird extra piping and extra caps. Do what you like if you think it can be saved from deletion as non-notable. Pam  D  22:43, 13 June 2018 (UTC)


 * I think it may be possible - I'm not 100%, but I found some small hints here and there. Thanks! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Tie signs suggestions
Thank you for the suggestions! I will begin implementing them.Dougok (talk) 20:22, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Tie signs
Hi Shalor. I think Tie signs was created by one of the students you're trying to help. This is another one which skipped AfC and was directly added to the mainspace. It seems like a interesting subject matter, but it also has kind of a research paper feel to it, with a bit of WP:OR and a little WP:PEA thrown in as well. Most of the sourcing seems to be primary to academic papers, but maybe that's OK for an article like this. Anyway, I did a little cleanup, but thought having some others look over it as well might be helpful. I'm not sure which WikiProjects cover articles such as this, but maybe it falls under the scope of WP:SOCIOLOGY and WP:PSYCHOLOGY. As always, I'm not trying to WP:BITE one of these student editors, but just want to make sure their work is OK for an article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:31, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * : Thanks for letting me know! I've left them a note on their talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:49, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi again Shalor. I just saw the above note from Marchjuly regarding the Tie signs article that I added to the Wiki mainspace. I am not sure what "skipped AfC" means, but I thought I might mention to you that the Wiki training suggests that we move our articles to the mainspace in the "Sandboxes and Mainspace" training module, which was week 2 for our class. Also, I thanked Marchjuly for the edits on his/her talk page. I wasn't aware of Wiki's particular punctuation requirements, they are different than what I am required to use in academia. I'll watch for that in the future. Lastly, Marchjuly removed a photo of Erving Goffman that I retrieved through Wiki's media tab, which is also labelled as "fair use". And, it is the same photo used on Goffman's main article page. So, I put it back in Tie Signs, and let Marchjuly know too. I asked him/her to let me know if I need to take it out for some reason. If it does need to come out again, I would just like to know why so I can avoid making the same mistake. Thanks!Dougok (talk) 20:52, 25 June 2018 (UTC) Hi Shalor, thanks for the explanation. I will do my best to abide by Wiki rules, and practices, including this one.Dougok (talk) 15:29, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ! Fair use only covers a very small amount of uses on Wikipedia - typically it can only be used to identify something (or someone) in their page, in an infobox. Essentially Wikipedia can justify the need for it to be in Goffman's article because it's needed to identify him, whereas it's harder to justify having it in the tie signs article because there's not really any need to identify him there since he's not the main topic of the article. It's kind of like how we can justify using a movie poster in an article about that movie whereas it's seen as unnecessary in an article about the film's director or lead actors. This all boils down to copyright, so it's something that Wikipedia has to be really careful about since fair use isn't the same as the images uploaded to Commons. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:38, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Peer reviews by students
Hi Shalor. I’m not sure if this has come up before and you’ve already answered it. If you have, then just link me in the right direction. Anyway, I don’t think article talk pages might be the best place for student peer reviews like the one at Talk:Tie signs. I understand that these “peer reviews” are part of the various class projects, but the student’s posting them might not be aware of WP:PR and mistakenly assume that the article talk page is strictly for class related stuff or other personal critiques. It might be better if students posted these on user talk pages or maybe class pages instead. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:58, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I support Marchjuly's comment 10,000 percent. This behavior is not recently instituted. See for example, Talk:Communal roosting. Mathglot (talk) 03:51, 29 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi, ! It was brought up here - the main gist is that we recommend that students write their peer reviews on their chosen student's sandbox/draft talk page rather than on live articles. Sometimes, however, the draft is moved live and the talk page posts remain. In this situation it looks like the person doing the peer review wasn't really sure where to post their review, as the student moved their page earlier than was expected. If the peer review isn't really helpful it can always be archived - I can also ask the student if they would be willing to have their review moved to the article creator's talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Shalor. Thanks for the link to that discussion. It contained osme interesting points. In "Tie signs" case the "peer review" was added after the draft was moved to the mainspace, so it wasn't anything carried over when the talk page was moved. While I can understand that this kind of review might be considered OK by some, the personal nature of it does seem to indirectly imply some kind of "ownership" of the article by the creator even though that might not be the intent. Moreover, since it's unclear how familiar some student editors are with relevant policies and guidelines, some suggestion might actually not be suitable for a Wikipedia article. That might not be pertenant to this specific case, but I kinda remember seeing suggestion made in other reviews of this type which were probably make perfect sense outside in the real world, but which are not in tune with the sometimes quirkiness of Wikipedia's MOS or basic policies/guidelines. Another editor might notice these things, but might be hesitant to point them out because the peer review appears to be part of a student project.
 * This brings me to my pet peeve regarding these types of articles which I'm pretty sure you've heard me mention before. If these projects are being graded, then it seems like a bad idea to move them to the mainspace until the course has finished. Some editors might not want to help a student get a good grade by fixing problems they see in an article; they might feel its unethical, unfair or even a kind of cheating. At the same time, some students might not want other editors messing with their work and be unhappy to have what they've done being changed by others even these changes are Wikipedia-type improvements. I occassionally see long-term experienced editors rather curtly decline request for help by paid editors simply because they don't want to do work that someone else is being paid to do. These are editors who normally have no problem otherwise diving in and improving articles, but who simply refuse to provide such help out of principle. I have to admit that I have felt similarly when it comes to student created articles. On one hand, I want to try and improve the article so that it's more suitable for Wikipedia, etc., but I don't want to be doing some student's assignment for them. I don't know why it is, but for some reason moving the article to the mainspace always seems to be some part of every school project I've come across. I really don't see any real value to doing that from either a student's perspective or a Wikipedia perspective, since it seems that everything class-related such as grading, etc. can all be sufficiently done at the draft stage. Once the course has finished, the article can be submitted via AfC or moved by the student and all of the peer reviews/draft comments, etc. can be archived or removed accordingly. Sort of a clean state for the new article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:40, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Shalor, I agree with Marchjuly about waiting until the course has finished. Of the two, AfC or move directly to main space, I'd prefer AfC. Doug Weller  talk 16:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * That makes sense to me. Having students go through the AfC process if they are writing a new article is a good idea. Thanks for the feedback . Jrpederson (talk) 11:39, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll pass all of this along! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The course instructor has just added their feedback/assessment as Talk:Tie signs. This kind of thing, once again, seems more appropariate for a user talk page or general class page than an article talk page. I'm going to post a note on the instructor's user talk advising them of this discussion. Perhaps they can make a suggestion or provide clarification. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:31, 30 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello all. Thanks for including me in the discussion. As a new instructor to Wiki Edu I am still learning the flow of Wikipedia and how the students are progressing through the various activities that I think will be helpful to their learning, and possibly, making contributions to the Wikipedia community. I agree with  about posting peer review type feedback on the user's talk page rather than on the article's talk page. I will move my feedback off the tie signs talk page and onto the student user's talk page. In terms of grading, I understand your where you are coming from . For me personally, I tell students that I am grading what is in their sandbox and not the any mainspace contributions. Students are welcome to move their drafted work from sandbox to the mainspace if they choose, but they should know that it will be available for other Wikipedians to edit once it goes "live." Jrpederson (talk) 11:39, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Another idea to add to the Wiki Edu trainings would be to instruct students how to create additional sandbox pages, or at least a new article page in their userspace. This might help with the problem of the draft page, along with the accompanying talk page, going live to the mainspace and thus making it challenging for peer reviewers to understand where to provide feedback. Just some ideas. I'm still new at all of this. Jrpederson (talk) 11:39, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone for all of this feedback - I've been passing all of this along to my colleagues and, I'll definitely pass along the information about the additional sandbox page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:19, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Need help request from Sarahkimes (talk)
Hello.

I need help with better understanding how to use my sandbox and talk button. The training was confusing.

--Sarahkimes (talk) 01:17, 30 June 2018 (UTC) — — [ [user:Shalor (Wiki ed) Thank you for the links. I just cant see to create a new article: my instructor will have us making articles and apparently you do this by using the sandbox to make an article? I am dyslexic, and cant see to understand the way this is supposed to happen...
 * Hi, what type of issues or questions do you have? With sandboxes, essentially you will edit it the same way that you will a live article. This video (not made by Wiki Ed) may help as well with showing off some of the things that you can do with Visual Editor. Also, if you don't have Visual Editor enabled, you can do this by following these directions. There's also some content about talk pages here. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2018 (UTC−
 * Hi, do videos help you more? This video goes over the process. The general gist is that you would open up the sandbox in edit mode - if you're using Visual Editor it should look a lot like editing in Word.
 * What learning processes work best for you? I can see if there's something I can put together that can help you with this. Do you do better with visual learning (ie, videos, step by step picture guides, etc)? I personally prefer a visual guide as opposed to an entirely or predominantly text only guide myself. I'll start putting something together on this end, if you like. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk)
 * I've started a bit of a guide here. Let me know if this style helps you and if there's anything in there that you need explained more. This is just the very beginning of editing in your sandbox and creating an article, so don't worry if you don't understand everything just yet - there's more trainings that will cover everything in a bit more depth. Right now I want to make sure that you're comfortable testing the editing tools in your sandbox. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:36, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

[ [user:Shalor (Wikied)

Thank you! I am tend to learn best with a combination of in person/visual and written, so the video is helpful. I have no idea what the visual editor is, though. I have not installed anything on my computer.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.224.21.19 (talk) 03:47, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
 * , VisualEditor is a way of editing on Wikipedia. It's pretty user friendly and I've come to prefer it to editing in source mode. The biggest difference between the two is that Visual Editor is like writing on a Word document and you don't have to worry as much about markup language since it does a lot of it for you automatically. I'll continue making the guides for you, if those are helpful. First things first though, I think you should enable Visual Editor on your account - it's definitely something that would make the process easier for you. You can use these directions to enable it. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:36, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you- this really helped. I think I will be able to use the sandbox now, thank you! Sarahkimes (talk) 01:05, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * - that's great! I can continue making these for you if you need them - they're actually kind of fun to make! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 13:28, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Sandbox
Ma'am,

I have a paragraph in my sandbox that I would like to add to/replace a paragraph with on another page. I am not sure I have it set up right and I would like you to look at it if you could please. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willk94ever (talk • contribs) 20:18, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ! It looks like you created the following new content:
 * In this training, Rain spent " I train everyday for 5 hours on Martial Arts and one hour on total body fitness" (Rain in The Making of Ninja Assassin) Rains trainer, Clay Enos, lauded his commitment. He said "Rain has shown a discipline that I have never experienced before" (Clay Enos in The Making of Ninja Assassin) He was learning up to 25 moves in a single action sequence daily. Chad Stohlenski stated "Rain was so good that we had to re-choreograph scenes to make them better".(Chad Stohlenski in The Making of Ninja Assassin)
 * This has some issues with grammar and I'd avoid using quotes unless it's absolutely necessary. It's typically better to summarize rather than use a lot of quotes. Summarizing this a little, it could be written like this, as a quick example: (you can use and adapt this if you like)
 * Rain reported that he trained daily for six hours, five of which were spent on martial arts and one on total body fitness. Trainer Clay Enos praised Rain's commitment and the film's martial arts choreographer and stunt coordinator for the film, Chad Stahelski, noted that his skill made it necessary to "re-choreograph scenes to make them better".
 * On a side note, I would try to find more or other sourcing than the making of documentary, if possible. Also, if you need info on how to cite a film, I found this source you can use as a guideline. I think that this is definitely something interesting to add to the section, FWIW. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:53, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Question
Hello,

I am having trouble understanding how to use the sandbox feature and then where to place my article once all of my editing is completed. Do I just leave all of my changes in the sandbox and my professor will be able to grade it from there or is there somewhere else it should be?

Thank you!Aniuni (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi ! Something I noted while looking at the page - it looks like the topic of the hyperpersonal theory model is already covered at hyperpersonal model. My recommendation would be to compare the two pages and see if there's anything in your draft that could be merged into the main article to help supplement the claims. You can definitely add the content yourself without waiting for the teacher. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC)