Skip to main content

Home/ Groups/ English 1111
Rss Feed
Sort By: Most Recent | Popular Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
sashainmpls

ENGL 1111 / Child Abuse - 0 views

engl1111.pbworks.com/Child-Abuse

shared by sashainmpls on 24 Feb 10 - Cached
  • Three key areas in which this article could be improved are: 1) writing quality; 2) comprehensive scope/depth; and 3) appropriate structure. Attending to and revising the content of this work with these three criteria in mind will help move the piece toward Wikipedia featured-article status (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria).
    • sashainmpls
      sashainmpls on 24 Feb 10
       
      Thesis statement in two sentences
g c

ENGL 1111 / Program: Jimmy Wales: Free Speech, Free Minds, Free Markets - 31 views

engl1111.pbworks.com/%2C-Free-Minds%2C-Free-Markets

shared by g c on 28 Jan 10 - Cached
    • g c
      g c on 28 Jan 10
       
      Hey look, everyone's comment disappeared. Yeah, that happens sometimes. Fear not, just read the comment in the wiki comment section further down the page.
    • Shawn McBurnie
      Shawn McBurnie on 28 Jan 10
       
      Quick, more duct tape!   (Rats.  I was kind of pleased with my comments - felt like I came closer than usual to saying what I meant.  I guess there's no chance of retrieving them?)
    • g c
      g c on 28 Jan 10
       
      You can bet I tried Shawn-- you can bet I tried. In the teaching game, we call this "horizontal learning". I learned something, but I didn't necessarily move forward, though it might help me move forward in the future-- I hope.
    • michelle olson
      michelle olson on 07 Feb 10
       
      Q1: I believe that when Lydon says that Wikipedia is "indispensible" he means thats it vital to the people and no one can live without this as a resource. When he says we he means people in general as a whole. Q2: I believe that Lydon is saying the truth when he say that wikipedia is for outspoken individuals building and sharing, also that this is democracy. Only because its not censored or edited by an editor but by anyone that has internet access.
  • anonymous on 28 Jan 10
     
    1.1 By using the word indispensable he is saying that to anyone with access to the Internet, Wikipedia should be an option when researching anything. It is always there instantly and free and provides you with information on just about any single topic you can think of. 1.2 When he talks about "we" he's talking about our current generation and the ones after us. We can not operate without Wikipedia (I know I can't). If anything, regardless of Wikipedia, I think what he's really trying to say is that current and future technology should be used to it's fullest and learning should be embraced with it and Wikipedia is one of the tools. 2. I think that's true. There are so many people that contribute to Wikipedia that bring knowledge to everyone that was once hard to find, hard to access, or that wasn't free. It really is a global treasury that is ever growing and becomes more valuable with the more contributers that are using it every single day.
  • ...3 more comments...
  • Kathie Bagniewski on 28 Jan 10
     
    I had saved my comments to a word doc... so I am reposting from Tuesday @ 12:43p CST REPOST (now in two places and even harder to delete Professor :) Q1: I am under the interpretation that when he states Wikipedia is "indispensable," he means that the Internet wouldn't be the same without it. I think he is trying to include more than just the mere fact of what it represents, the information it houses. I think he also is implying that it represents a movement that has connected the populous in ways never before. The level to which it satisfies (to a degree; different for each user) the individual needs & curiosities is equaled in the overall impact it has. Not knowing what we did before its inception and flourish, he cannot fathom what it would be like to revert back. I believe he thinks it is as great as landing on the moon. By the "we," I believe it is the entirety of the population (those computer-user friendly), not just those in the room with him. He is including me, speaking on my behalf, and I don't even know the guy. Q2: I agree with the fact that the info contained within is created/generated by the those who have input/interest and is edited by those who also have knowledge (to whatever degree) on said topic; that there are constant reviews occurring, with modifications following until a consensus or "universal" level is reached; that it appeals to the masses. I do tend to side with the fact that the democracy is on the receiving end. It feels that the way he uses democracy, in conjunction with the rest of his speech, he is also indicating there is a democracy on production/giving end. That I do not agree with. The content is under scrutiny and can be manipulated to the liking of those on the "controlling" end. I think that changes us from a democracy into a variation of communism, as the information is subject to censorship and in the end we are only reading what is "allowed."
  • Dennisha Brown on 28 Jan 10
     
    Q1. The definition of essential to me is not to be neglected or set aside; essential. Mr. Lydon used it as a sales pitch when referring to Wikipedia. And with the bad publicity Wikipedia has been receiving lately who wouldn't. As for Wikipedia being indispensable I disagree. There are many other resources out there that makes Wikipedia in the same category as a blog. I think Wikipedia is just a fast and easy way to get information or an idea of what you may be looking for. "We", Lydon, to me, is speaking of him and Wikipedia's many users. Q2. Maybe I am being pessimistic by saying this, but there are a great deal of disturbed people in the world. I wish I could say Wikipedia have some great people with good motives but you can't. Some people will see an opportunity and cease it the moment they get the chance. This is why you have different businesses such as "Wal-Mart" cleaning up their "profiles". "Outspoken individuals building and sharing a Universal treasury in a global mind"... I agree with this statement but only with the first part. There are outspoken individuals some with good intentions and others not so good. As for Wikipedia being a "global mind" I disagree. Although it has reached many countries and there are users from the all over the world, it is not safe to say Wikipedia is the thoughts of the entire world. This is an exaggeration.
  • Isabel da Silva on 29 Jan 10
     
    I also saved my answers from January 24th. So I am reposting it!!! *.* Q1: I believe that Lydon's claim regarding Widipedia's indispensability refers to how this technology has evolved into our everyday use as tool for gathering information. In the same ways as telephone, email, or even indoor plumbing - which people functioned fine without before they were invented and made widely available - Wikipedia is now something that most of us cannot imagine not having. I believe his reference to "we" is to all people - or at least to all people in industrialized nations with access to modern technology. References to the scope of Wikipedia and the numbers of countries, languages, and users it is embraced by support this. Q2: I believe that this assertion is half true, given that "universal" participation of a "global" mind would include people from all nations, regions, and socio-economic levels. While amazing in its scope and involvement (or potential involvement) of millions of people, Wikipedia is a technology that requires access to modern technology (e.g., computers, electricity) - and this technology is not universally available. For example, I recently heard a statistic that said that the number of computers per household in Edina is significantly higher than it is in the Midway neighborhoods of St. Paul - and I am sure that the number of computers per household in impoverished nations in 3rd world countries is lower than it is in countries like the United States and Europe. So, participation in Wikipedia is likely more "widespread" than it is "universal."
  • anonymous on 29 Jan 10
     
    Q1. I think that to start with that he is talking about that to himself, personally, Wikipedia is indispensable. Indispensable is something that you can't live without. It's has become such a normal part of his and many of our lives, that it would be very difficult to go without it. When he says "we" I think he is referring to Internet users in general. Jimmy Wales talks about the percentage of people on the Internet that use Wikipedia. This high percentage shows how important this site has become and still becoming to the Internet Q2. Wikipedia is still in its infancy and has a long way to go to get to the Utopia of information that they are imagining. I do think that this is the closest that humans have ever been to this goal. There is no corporation or government controlling what is put onto Wikipedia. I'd say at this time it is half true. There is still a very low population of Wikipedia users that edit that site and until it is a much higher percentage how can you call it a "global mind".
  • andy kocon on 04 Feb 10
     
    I had my answers posted by the regular due date on the main Jimmy Wales page. I wasn't able to join the group right away and wasn't able to leave comments. So now that it IS working I thought I would post my answer again just in case you didn't notice or read them on the previous posted page. Thanks, Andy 1. I believe Lydon says Wikipedia is "indispensible" because in this new internet technology world people need a quick easy source to find information. Books used to be the basis of finding information but slowly became a secondary option to find information. So by saying Wikipedia is indispesible, I think he means people need a quick, internet source that is accessable to everyone like a ordinary encyclopedia book, otherwise we wouldn't be able to find resources easily or functionally via the internet. When Lyndon says "we" he mean's people who use the internet on a day to day basis to find information. 2. The opinon about individuals sharing information on Wikipedia I feel is half true. Those contributers have there own opinions on such situations which are okay but don't always come out to be true, making this more of a "Outspoken" resource. Beyond this, there are also heavily knowledged individuals that choose to share direct facts with others through Wikipedia, making this more acceptable for the use of such website.
Kathie Bagniewski

Best content in English 1111 | Diigo - Groups - 6 views

groups.diigo.com/...english-1111

shared by Kathie Bagniewski on 29 Jan 10 - No Cached
    • Julia Grim
      Julia Grim on 29 Jan 10
       
      Lydon's assertion that we wouldn't be able to live without Wikipedia is a little ridiculous. We got along fairly well without it before, didn't we? Wikipedia is wonderful, but it is not necessary to our existence. It makes our lives easier by providing us with general, as well as in depth, information about the world around us, does so very quickly, and is quite easy to access. Its indispensability is obvious in that there is no way we could ignore the powerhouse that it has become. Its popularity is huge, even in China where it was banned, when people were finding ways of getting around the ban to use the site. The numbers tell us that with millions of pages in hundreds of languages, the trend has caught on, and Wikipedia has become something we rely on daily, almost to the same degree as cell phones. We think we need it at all times, for "just in case", and it comes in handy, but before we got it, we did fine without it. By "we", Lydon is referring to the internet-using population (Wales' thoughts are that the number is over one billion people). "We", the technology using and sharing group, the forward-thinking and -moving ones. Regarding Lydon's statement about distributed intelligence, I would have to (mostly) agree. Given the number of pages created in so many languages, the reach is not quite global, but very close. Also, there are pages that contain accurate information, but there are those that contain inaccurate information, or a mix of both. I see Wikipedia trying to improve the quality of the postings in the future.
    • Kathie Bagniewski
      Kathie Bagniewski on 31 Jan 10
       
      Testing Sticky Note Functionality - Take 2
    • Kathie Bagniewski
      Kathie Bagniewski on 31 Jan 10
       
      oooooohhhhh - how fun is this?? :)
    • Kathie Bagniewski
      Kathie Bagniewski on 31 Jan 10
       
      I can see this getting out of hand easily.... step away from the sticky notes Kathie...
    • joellyn p
      joellyn p on 01 Feb 10
       
      Calm down, take a deep breath and remove your hdands from the computer Kathie...
    • Kathie Bagniewski
      Kathie Bagniewski on 01 Feb 10
       
      ha ha ha :)
1 - 3 of 3
Showing 20▼ items per page
Apply to join this group