Kingap21

Kingap21, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kingap21! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Kingap21, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Ian and I work with Wiki Education; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:15, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Instructor Feedback for Draft

Overall, I think you are adding some nice contributions with your new content areas. The origins section is good, but try to simplify the language and sentence structure a bit. For example, this phrasing is cumbersome: "the apology has origins as primarily a verbal dialogue between the author of defense and the addressee to whom an apology is given" Stating that the apology has three parts is important, but it does not seem to fit well under the "origins" section. Do you have a source for that information as well? The first added paragraph in the "efficacy" section covers a few different elements of the apology process and seems disjointed. I'm not sure of the connection to efficacy as well. Clarifying the fit would be helpful here. In the section addition in the efficacy section, the second paragraph provides some good insights, but the style is much too formal and academic. Try to simplify, elaborate, and provide examples in order to appeal to a wider audience that could be reading this Wikipedia article. Although the addition about governments and organizations apologizing is an important contribution it does not seem to fit the section of "whether to apologize." I think you could create a new section and expand this contribution. Although it gets beyond relational communication perspectives of apologizing, if you are interested in these forms of apologies I think it would be a helpful addition to this existing Wikipedia article. Remember to have at least 5 scholarly journal articles as sources. You may have other sources such as a Freaknomics podcast episode or our course textbook, but you need to rely on peer-reviewed journal articles for information as well. Jrpederson (talk) 02:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)