User:Atallent/NMAC 3108 Journal

May 31, 2019: Introduction

Hello!

My name is Amber Tallent and I am 19 years old.

This will be my second semester here at Middle Georgia State University as I transferred in from Gordon State College at the beginning of the year. I am on the path to graduating at the end of 2020’s summer semester with a Bachelor of Arts in New Media and Communications. After I graduate, my goal is to work in the field of broadcast media or in film production.

One interesting thing about me is that I have been a vegetarian for eight years. In my free time, some of the things that I like to do are paint, edit videos, and walk my dog.

I am looking forward to what is to come from this class and I hope everyone has a great semester!

@Atallent: Good to meet you, and welcome to NMAC 3108. I was a vegan for 6 years until I moved to Georgia. 😉 —Grlucas (talk) 13:27, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atallent: It's nice to meet you! I am also majoring in new media and communications and I look to work in the sames fields after graduation as well. Unfortunately, it looks like my graduation date will not be until December 2020. —Aaliyah

June 2, 2019: Week One Reflection

I was left feeling a little intimidated when I first entered this course and saw that it was going to be taught through a platform that I am completely unfamiliar with. Although, after getting started, reading through the course site, and listening to the audio guides, my worries leveled a little bit.

So far, my experience in completing the first week’s course work has gone relatively smoothly. I have completed a few training models on WikiEdu and learned the basics of navigating and posting to Wikipedia.

As week one draws to a close, I look forward to new challenges that I will face as they will help me learn and gain experience on a platform that I would have likely never interacted with in this way before entering the course.

@Atallent: I am totally new to posting in Wikipedia also, I found the Sandbox and Show preview function to be very useful. It’s actually kind of fun now. -AaHoward (talk) 00:12, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atallent: I 100% understand where you are coming from. The start of this course was also a very daunting experience for myself as well. However, I do believe that things will take a turn for the better the more we use to this new form of writing. -Ousainou Adeniyi (talk)

June 9, 2019: Neutral Attributions

One point that was brought up in the NPOV tutorial from this week’s reading was the power that the word “said” has.

This was something that I never noticed before taking my first news writing class this past spring semester. In the class, we were taught that “said” was the “magic word” and that we should use only it when quoting people in our articles. In the past, I often used the variants that were mentioned in the tutorial such as “noted” and “explained” in my writings for variation, but I have become aware of how these types of attributions could introduce bias into one’s writings depending on context and the POV of others.

The most neutral way to get a point across is through using “said” in situations like these especially when editing in Wikipedia. It is something that we should all look out for and be conscious of when writing our own works!

@Atallent: Hey! You place some good points here. I never really thought about it this way until this class either. The word "said" has tons of power and can even make or break some people in some fields of work even if they never actually said what had been heard by someone else. Strasburg7312 (talk) 15:36, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atallent: Great Job and thank you for sharing your insight. Spoken and written language is much more powerful than we often realize. We communicate so frequently that we can take it for granted. Staying neutral in our daily conversations, that is keeping our bias and assumptions out of our conversations makes a big difference in being able to reach our audience. Now, I'm really reminding myself what I need to continue working on. Keep up the great work.

@Atallent: I never thought about "noted" and "explained" to be bias. The tutorial taught some valuable information that I wasn't aware of. Tionnetakala (talk) 23:53, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

June 9, 2019: Article Evaluation

The article I chose to evaluate is about industrial arts.

The first thing that I noticed when preparing to evaluate this article is its need for more references as the page only lists one. The one reference link works, but it does not bring readers to a site that is as useful as it could be in backing the fact stated in that portion of the article.

The lead section of the article is rather distracting as there is not a clear flow of information. Focus is only put on the section’s many topics for a short period of time and then moves on without providing a deeper look into what was said. The article contains a large number of hyperlinks which are sometimes not needed as most would know “technology,” “design,” and “United States” without having to reference a separate Wikipedia article. I noticed a few spelling and punctuation errors that need to be fixed as well.

Under the article’s talk page, there are only four entries and the most recent one that was posted was over five years ago. For the most part, the entries are good and offer possible sources to include that would strengthen the article and there are also topics that have been suggested to add as the users believe them to be important to the topic at hand.

A detailed view was given to industrial arts as it pertains to the curriculum in New South Wales schools. This could introduce a bias as emphasis is not put on other areas around the world, but this is likely due to the lack of editors collaborating on this page. In the portions featuring NSW curriculum, it remains neutral by providing readers with the facts of how this study is taught to students throughout the course of high school.

June 16, 2019: Brevity

In one of my previous journal posts, I mentioned how my news writing class prepared me for giving attributions in a neutral and unbiased way.

After reading over chapter five of Brian Carroll’s Writing & Editing for Digital Media, I was reminded of another important aspect of writing in spaces people use for information and entertainment purposes. This aspect, which Carroll points out, is brevity.

We consume massive amounts of information every day so when it comes to the internet, the information needs to be presented in a way that captures the reader’s eyes immediately and hopefully keeps their interest to where they continue browsing. As in writing news articles, you need to get straight to the point and present the reader with the most important information first. After that, you are able to include the other details that pertain to the story.

Our attention spans are why news articles and Wikipedia articles are written as such which explains why brevity is so important in the digital world. If the “three-second rule” by Dale Dougherty remains true, content creators are going to have to become even more creative in capturing the audience’s interest and subsequent interaction with their site.

June 17, 2019: Potential Articles

Noah's Ark Animal Sanctuary

In the audio guide located under the RQ1 tab, it was said that we are able to research our own hometown. Seeing as I am not from Macon, I chose to look for articles that dealt with places a little closer to home.

For my first potential article, I am looking to edit Noah's Ark Animal Sanctuary. The first issue that comes up with this article is that it says it might not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, but I was hoping it could still be a possibility after more research has been put into it. The center is a large attraction in Locust Grove and it has its own unique story that could be told further.

Reading over the article, the information seems to remain neutral while giving off a few defining facts about the center. One of the major things that needs to be fixed is the page’s formatting so it can set up a clear flow of information. Right now, all of the references are from dated news articles. With that being said, the information presented needs to be significantly added upon and the use of more notable sources needs to be cited as well to improve the article’s overall quality.

Locust Grove Historic District

Another potential article I could further research is the Locust Grove Historic District. Not much detail is given on this page so further research about the area’s homes and businesses could improve this look into this small town.

The article is rated stub-class and includes two quality references that further the information already present. There is not much writing on the page so what is there appears to remain neutral in its description.

One way to improve this article would be to add additional writing and provide more information and pictures of the town’s residential area and commercial district which falls into this category as well. In addition, the Locust Grove Institute article could also be added upon when choosing this topic as the building is a defining feature of this town and is a part of Locust Grove’s historic district.

@Atallent: I agree with your choices, though I think the former might be better for you. —Grlucas (talk) 20:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

June 23, 2019: Copyediting and Citations

My experience copyediting my selected article, Noah's Ark Animal Sanctuary, went relatively smoothly. I added two section headings (History and Animals) to the article so it would establish a flow amongst the information already present and make the article’s content easier for individuals to navigate. I also reworded a sentence to where the information flowed better.

I removed a sentence that sounded a little too much like an ad and had to remove the three dead reference links that were intended to be used for providing more information about that topic. The articles contained in those links are over five years old which could be a possibility to why they are no longer active on their original site.

When it came to adding citations, I was able to find two online sources so far that were not the organization’s website. I used these sources in places where it helped support the article’s statements.

I will continue my search for more reference articles and sources at my local library and at the organization itself as the week begins.

@Atallent: All good work. Try to practice sourcing in your posts from now on. For example, why is changing something that sounds like an ad important? Keep up the good work. —Grlucas (talk) 15:18, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

@Atallent: I found your journal entry interesting to read and I thought it was clear and concise. I think all of the edits you made were necessary and it shows that you have a good understanding of working on Wikipedia. —Ajhawkins95 (talk)

June 24, 2019: Tailoring Content

The content provided on a page, as explained in chapter six of Brian Carroll’s Writing & Editing for Digital Media, is what the audience finds most important. Anything extra such as its visual presentation or technological features does not hold as much weight as long as they are able to find the information they are seeking.

As we edit our own Wikipedia article, this is important to keep in mind. Before we add information, we should think about who might visit the page, what kinds of information they are likely looking for, and how what we add will help in filling those gaps they initially had. In doing this, the page will develop into an informative piece where individuals can come to get their questions or curiosity answered.

@Atallent: I recommend changing the title of journal posts labeled "Free Journal Post" to a descriptive title. For example, this journal post could be titled "Keeping One's Audience in Mind". Also, this post feels like it should have at least one reference in order to support your findings. I recommend referencing Carroll's book directly. It would be even better if you provided the exact page number that the idea appears on.—TSchiroMGA (talk) 13:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

July 1, 2019: Hunt for Sources

Last week, I headed to the library to see what type of information they had on Noah's Ark Animal Sanctuary.

I did not have much luck other than finding a book that was published about the center’s most notable inhabitants which were the lion, tiger, and bear trio known as “BLT.” The book entitled Lion, Tiger, and Bear by Kate Ritchey tells the story of how the trio came to be, how they made their way to Noah’s ark, and how they adjusted to life at the sanctuary.

I will use this source when creating a section for them in the article.

@Atallent I think it is great that you have chosen to do something on Noah's Ark Animal Rehabilitation Center! I'm sure that if you called the center, that someone would have some great information on resources they might have. I'm sure somewhere like that would have a brochure or something that gives a brief description of its' history and what they do. Another source to check out might be to the Explore Georgia website.

@Atallent: Their website includes information on the type of charity that it is, so that might be helpful information to include. The center is most famously known for the BLT trio, and in 2016, Leo (the lion) passed away. Because of their unique story, it might be helpful to include some information about the trio and their lives together. LynzeeWhite (talk) 14:55, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

July 1, 2019: Peer Review Reflection

@Sabub:‘s peer review of the article that I am editing addressed many important points. There is a lot of information that still needs to be added and updated to make the article a source that provides the appropriate information one would need to understand what this sanctuary truly is.

There is a lot more to be discovered and explained about this organization and the two sources that were suggested are great starts to help building up this article further! I also agree that the two references that were already present in the article before I began editing need to be updated or replaced with other reliable sources if I am not able to locate those that were originally cited years ago.

The peer reviews this week were helpful because I was able to learn what an outside eye looking in sees when they review my assigned article. From this review, I was also able to hear what type of information they believe would be good to include or elaborate on further which will help guide how I alter the article’s content in the future.

@Atallent: Hey Atallent, it's great that you maintain a positive attitude towards constructive criticism. It's not always easy for me to receive a critique but it's a great way to evaluate one's work and make improvements. Good luck with your article.

July 7, 2019: Article Evaluation of Panama City

I decided to evaluate the Wikipedia article, Panama City, Florida, so I could learn a little bit more about the place that I am visiting for the next week. The first thing I noticed was how updated the page was. The last edit was made 22 days ago.

When looking over the article's references, they were relatively updated but, there were two links that did not connect to a server properly and would need to be either removed or replaced with ones that work. Many of the reference links also connected to home pages and did not provide readers with direct access to where they found the information used.

The article’s infobox was a good addition to have to increase the article’s scannability of important information since it is a rather long article.

Since the Wikipedia page about the city’s current mayor was removed, the link used in the article should be removed to eliminate the red link connected to the name. The hyperlink for the template of the Panhandle of Florida should also be removed since there is not a page that currently provides further information on that topic.

The lead section was strong and provided the information needed for a person to understand what the article will discuss. The rest of the article abided by Wikipedia’s guidelines of remaining neutral in content. The page did not seem like an advertisement to get people to visit the city which is not the purpose of a Wikipedia article.

The article's Talk page also has a lot of discussion going on and people detailing what they added and removed as they should to be considerate of the other editors collaborating on the page.

July 8, 2019: Learning

Text

Before reading Carroll’s “Public Relations in a Digital Age,” I always thought customer opinion to be strong, but what I did not realize is how much stronger a company’s response is to these situations presented to them through social media. While the driving force behind social media is posting and sharing content, the other half of it is listening, monitoring, and responding in a way that builds a connection with your customers and your potential customers.

Social media is a platform that allows companies to observe how their customers react and what they react to. From this, they are able to learn how to interest and engage their audience and utilize this to their advantage.

Wiki Editing

One thing I learned about Wikipedia this week that I did not know how to do before is how to create subheadings. Creating subheadings under a general topic is important because it allows for categorization of related information, making it easier to navigate a page and break down important related topics.

To create a subheading, you simply put three equal signs (===) on either side of the word or words you chose to display. You then publish your changes after adding the appropriate information underneath.

I used this feature on the Wikipedia article I am editing, Noah's Ark Animal Sanctuary, to break down the topic “BLT” so I can discuss important information about all three of the lion, tiger, and bear trio separately after discussing the story of how they came to be first.

@Atallent: Good, but links and references would support your post. —Grlucas (talk) 15:55, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

June 15, 2019: Adding Pictures

I have visited Noah's Ark Animal Sanctuary many times in my life as it is located near where I live in Locust Grove, but my most recent visit felt different. I was on a mission to gather sources and analyze the sanctuary and its inhabitants so I could better include information in its Wikipedia page.

I contributed five of my own pictures that I took previously and placed them under the “Gallery” section that I added to the page. I took inspiration from Zoo Atlanta’s Wikipedia page as the attraction is similar to Noah’s Ark. I felt that a gallery of the zoo/sanctuary’s animals helped viewers of the article to get a better sense of what type of animals the organizations hold. Rather than just showing off one or two photos, providing a larger number gives a greater look into the diversity of the animals present which entices interest.

The most challenging thing was figuring out how and in what way to add these pictures to the article. After uploading these images to Wikimedia Commons, they provided text that could be copied from that page and added to the article for the picture to appear, but in doing that, the images appeared vertically rather than horizontally as I wanted.

I used the Wikipedia help page Help:Gallery tag to understand how to use the proper syntax to format a Wikitext that would result in the right type of gallery I was aiming for. To achieve what I currently have on the page, I used a code along the lines of:

• 
  Blue and Gold Macaw

I contemplated using a slideshow as my method of displaying the pictures on the page because there were so many, but I decided against it and chose packed mode as most might not take the time to scroll through one so it would be more effective to see it all at once than to risk the chance of viewers only seeing one slide.

June 15, 2019: Renaming/Moving Page

One of the major things I needed to fix about the Wikipedia page of Noah's Ark Animal Sanctuary was the article’s name itself.

When I first visited the page, it was entitled "Noah’s Ark Animal Rehabilitation Center," but that has not been or is not currently the name of the organization. To make the page as accurate as can be, I decided to attempt to change the article’s name completely rather than just the text contained in the page.

This was a process that I was nervous to try as I did not want to mess anything up, but I decided to “be bold” in my Wikipedia editing. I used the Wikipedia project page, Wikipedia:Moving a page, as a guide to help me do so properly. Through this attempt, I learned that it is a relatively easy process to rename a page, known as “moving a page,” of an article that already exists if the title is either misspelled, incorrect, or for other reasons.

After consulting the section “Reasons for moving a page,” it was confirmed that I needed to continue on in this process as the name, "Noah’s Ark Animal Sanctuary," is the common name of the organization.

I located the “Move” subtab at the top of my article’s page and continued following the steps outlined in “How to move a page” until the final click of the button. All of the original page’s content has now been moved to the current one and all of the links created previously that contain the old name are redirected to the current page as well.

@Atallent: It look slike your article is coming along — way to be bold! Remember, there is no space between the word and/or punctuation mark with footnotes, and Wikipedia articles (internal links) should not be footnoted — just linked to inline. —Grlucas (talk) 11:50, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

July 23, 2019: Reflection

Critiquing articles

Seeing these underdeveloped articles that were potential candidates for being edited during this assignment, gave insight into the amount of work and time that has been dedicated to editing these fully developed and informative articles that one is accustomed to seeing. What I learned most about Wikipedia during the article evaluation is how little attention the areas around us like these small towns, local organizations, museums, and attractions receive.

The places we are familiar with are not being represented as we know them, so a voice like ours was needed to help in building one for it. With that in mind, I approached critiquing my article, Noah’s Ark Animal Sanctuary, by first envisioning the most important things that are associated with the organization. I then noted if things such as their famous lion, tiger, bear trio were either already present in the article or if it needed to be included which was later referenced when adding my own contributions.

Contributions

The article now, compared to the original version, has evolved considerably. The article currently appears much more lively as the additional section headings, information, and pictures have improved its overall feeling. The article began as blocks of text with no clear direction all located under the lead section which is only supposed to contain the most relevant information for a viewer to understand what the article is about.

The addition of section headings increased the article’s quality alone as it improved the viewer’s ability to scan through the included information. This is an aspect needed in the digital age as viewer’s attention spans are rapidly decreasing. The addition of the photos contained in the "Gallery" section increases the viewers’ connection with the sanctuary as it allows them to put a face to a name essentially.

The thing that makes Noah’s Ark unique was being home to the only “BLT" trio known to the world. That is why a significant portion of my edits were dedicated to adding upon this topic. I spoke of them as a whole and how they came to be and I also spoke of them each separately, giving viewers a deeper look into the lives of these brothers. I also spent time editing and adding to the smaller details of the article for the information to be as accurate as possible.

Peer Review

The peer review process was informative as it challenged us to apply what we have learned in critiquing one of our peer’s articles. In doing so, we were able to act as a fresh set of eyes and provide useful feedback for what we thought was missing, could be added, or removed to make the article’s overall quality better. In doing so it also reminded us of things we should apply to our own articles as taking on the role of a viewer instead of an editor reminds you of the small things you might forget are important. This process served as a indirect collaboration that benefited each participant.

In my peer review of Coliseum Northside Hospital I suggested two main edits should be made. The first thing I suggested was to fix the lead section. It was not serving its purpose as effectively as possible so I suggested rearranging or moving some of the information out completely. The second suggestion I had was to create an infobox containing important key elements and pieces of information that should be easily seen when first encountering the article.

In a classmate’s peer review of my article, she recommended that I focus my attention on adding more information as that was what the article needed the most at the time. She also pointed out that sourcing was an issue, so I should look into updating or replacing those references that were present previously as well as considering using the two sources she suggested might be helpful. She also recommended I update the sanctuary’s revenue which was dated and consider researching how much donations they receive on average.

Feedback

In reviewing the feedback I received, I took each suggestion and recommendation seriously. Everything that was mention about my article and journal posts were things that I agreed should be done and fixed as well. Throughout this process, I worked on trying to improve and fix the mistakes I made when they were brought to my attention. I appreciated this feedback more than anything because I was able to learn from it and use this knowledge as I moved forward.

Wikipedia Experience

Contributing to Wikipedia was a unique experience separate from any other that I have partaken in both my educational career thus far and in my personal endeavors. I have never posted any such work on a public platform such as this and diving in and editing an article that I did not create felt like I was trespassing in some way, but through this initial shock, I ultimately became more comfortable and grew from this experience.

I think having this opportunity that brings people out of their comfort zones but is still a part of a somewhat traditional classroom environment, opens more doors and leads to curiosity that has a higher possibility of being followed by those who have had this experience. A Wikipedia assignment exposes you to the vast world that is the internet. With a traditional paper, you turn it in and the assignment is complete, but with Wikipedia, an article’s work is never done as there is always more to add and more information to be found.

Wikipedia can be used to improve public understanding of my topic because that is the goal of a Wikipedia article, for an individual having left knowing the ins and outs of the topic at hand. If the public were to view the article for Noah’s Ark Animal Sanctuary, they will have left understanding what the place is and does, what kinds of animals they house, and information about the organization’s most notable inhabitants, “BLT.” This is this important because it brings attention to everything from small to large from all around the world. Having access to this type of information connects us to the world around us and sparks our interest in learning about new and unfamiliar things as well as learning more about the things we may already think we know about because they are close to us.

@Atallent: Indeed, we must sometimes be forced out of our comfort zones to actually learn something. Well done. —Grlucas (talk) 11:40, 24 July 2019 (UTC)