Talk:Content creation/Archives/2014

March 2014 update

One of the primary improvements that we can make this article is adding more credible information. The existing information is fine and properly sourced, but as it stands, the article is short. The paragraphs beneath the headings could use some expansion, and possibly the introduction as well, should we find some good examples to add. We may also decide to add another section based on the resources that we find. HSLightPlayer (talk) 17:35, 19 March 2014 (UTC)HSLightPlayer

Welcome students

Hi SI110! I just wanted to say thanks for taking on this stub article. I'm looking forward to collaborating with you. I'm happy to help if you have questions about Wikipedia or want to discuss things on this talk page.--Libraryowl (talk) 19:47, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

Peer Feedback

Lead section does a good job of summarizing the concept and the addition of examples helps to clarify the subject in a clear and concise way. I think the content could have been structured differently. This leads into balance as well. There are subsections that do not have any content or description, for example the “Content Creators” section. I think the article could have been organized differently so that the gaps aren’t labeled as subheadings. Similarly, there is an entire heading, “Content creation and intellectual property,” that doesn’t have any information within it. The content is more heavily concentrated beneath content creators than the final three sections. The authors do a good job of presenting information is an unbiased way. Additionally, the article references many reliable resources such as studies, academic papers and journals, and articles. Sjknow (talk) 02:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll try to stay out of your feedback section since I'm not in your class, but as a note to other students who might have similar concerns--I'm the editor working on structure. I plan to fill the empty sections with information in the next few days, so please don't delete them. I also cleared the information that was in the "intellectual property" section, since it was improperly sourced and being challenged by other editors, but since it's an important part of this article, it needs to be filled back in with reliable information. There is more about this in the article's edit history. If inspiration hits and you'd like to help fill in these sections or change something, that is fine with me, but I don't want you to be counted off because of my edits/drafting. I think you've done a good job so far in expanding this stub article on a significant subject. --Libraryowl (talk) 02:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Definition

"Content creation is the creation of content..." Wow... --Albeiror24 - English - Español - Italiano - ខ្មែរ 11:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)