RobertMem
Creating a user page edit
Hi, Robert! I was putting a list of classes in the Wikipedia Education Program together and thought you may want to create a user page for yourself (noticed your red link)! Just include some relevant information, perhaps linking to your Course Page. It's not necessary but is helpful for communicating with others on-wiki! Hope your class is going well! Ping me if you need anything. JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 21:09, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Some things edit
Hi Robert, I'm Rcsprinter and I believe you're leading the course at Memphis University on Wikipedia. I've noticed that most of the articles created by your students aren't really very good, and you've spoken about that at Wikipedia:Education noticeboard/Incidents. It would be appreciated if you could tell your students that articles should be the best they can get them before publishing, and submitting it last minute to get a grade isn't helpful for an encyclopedia. Now, I nominated Kali Muscle for deletion and saw you posted a comment on the discussion (do you use a watchlist?), agreeing that deletion would be OK. Can you explain to the student why it is important articles are written and not simply taken from sources? And as a formatting note, you only need to sign with four tildes (~~~~) and not ~~~~RobertMem as the tildes will provide your username as well as timestamp. Thanks for being cooperative and good luck with the course! Rcsprinter (chatter) @ 19:43, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Most definitely I agree on the editing and deleting is not a problem at all. The final day of class was actually this past Tuesday. My suspicion is that for the ones that might be candidates for deletion, the students in question were simply throwing up something at the last minute to satisfy course requirements. As I noted in the noticeboard, my immediate solution for next year will not be to require students to have articles go live, but rather for them to submit for review. I also have a few other ideas for improving and will appreciate any suggestions, or resources to direct me as well. Although I have been a long time user, believer, and supporter of Wikipedia, I clearly needed more insight than what was offered in the brochures before leading the class. I think that some of the articles are quite good, some of the edits to existing pages are meaningful, and perhaps one-third of the 18 students produced unusable or very marginal articles. In fact, there are three very solid fail grades, including the noted piece above. I appreciate everyone's patience on this. RobertMem (talk) 20:13, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- I think that to write good articles you've got to want to do it. It's like writing anything else: if you're not committed then the final output won't be as good. I certainly wanted to do it but it took a while before articles that I wrote were good enough. It's not really the kind of thing that can be jumped into head first. This was an opt-in class, right? :) Which would you say were the best so far? I'll drop a bit of friendly encouragement to them. I could even arrange to do it during your class if we can get our time zones right. Rcsprinter (message) @ 20:25, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Wait, I just noticed that "The final day of class was actually this past Tuesday". Thanks anyway. Rcsprinter (chinwag) @ 19:36, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
- Most definitely I agree on the editing and deleting is not a problem at all. The final day of class was actually this past Tuesday. My suspicion is that for the ones that might be candidates for deletion, the students in question were simply throwing up something at the last minute to satisfy course requirements. As I noted in the noticeboard, my immediate solution for next year will not be to require students to have articles go live, but rather for them to submit for review. I also have a few other ideas for improving and will appreciate any suggestions, or resources to direct me as well. Although I have been a long time user, believer, and supporter of Wikipedia, I clearly needed more insight than what was offered in the brochures before leading the class. I think that some of the articles are quite good, some of the edits to existing pages are meaningful, and perhaps one-third of the 18 students produced unusable or very marginal articles. In fact, there are three very solid fail grades, including the noted piece above. I appreciate everyone's patience on this. RobertMem (talk) 20:13, 6 December 2013 (UTC)