Stellalqx
Hello (BarrieMichelle (talk) 16:43, 25 September 2012 (UTC))
Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse! edit
|
Hello! Stellalqx,
you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!
|
I, and the rest of the hosts, would be more than happy to answer any questions you have! SarahStierch (talk) 04:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
WikiWomen's Collaborative edit
| WikiWomen Unite! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi Stellalqx! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative. As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:
We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can participate! |
Hi there! Damatucci (talk) 16:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Your page on communication accommodation theory looks like it's already really robust! One thing that struck me as I was initially scanning the page was that there is a lot of information in large blocks of text, which makes it a bit difficult to read. I am wondering if it would make the page look cleaner if you broke up the large amounts of text into smaller paragraphs (eg: under 'Convergence', maybe you could make that three paragraphs instead of one. Damatucci (talk) 16:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Additionally, I am wondering if there are any images you could add to spice up the page. I know this might be difficult because Wikipedia is very strict when it comes to images, but is there maybe a picture you can take yourself that encompasses some ideas about the theory and add? Just a thought! Damatucci (talk) 16:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi Stella! Your page looks great! One thing I noticed while you were editing the paper is that some of the references seem a bit old. One idea maybe to look for references within the last five years. Additionally, I agree with Dorothy's comment - adding bullets points may make the page easier to read so that the article can be assessed by Wikipedia. Furthermore, adding internal links within wikipedia would help the article be assessed by Wikipedia. Overall, the page looks awesome! Reinamg (talk) 04:28, 13 November 2012 (UTC)