User talk:JayKatJay

Welcome!

Hello, JayKatJay, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Elysia 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. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:27, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

Hi JayKatJay, I've left some feedback for you here! Thank you for your patience :) Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elysia, Thank you for your feedback! Turns out that the Reflective writing article I was working on was also being worked on by someone else, and it looks as though that editor and I have collaborated effectively. Hooray! JayKatJay (talk) 05:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Writing's January Events

WikiProject Writing Presents "Global Scholars - Latin America" | January 2022

Content Spotlight This month, we are working to better represent Latin American scholars—Emilia Ferreiro, Luiz Antonio Marcuschi, Paula Carlino, Elvina Narvaja de Anoux, Angela B. Kleiman, Desiree Motta-Roth, and Virginia Zavala—and their key works on both field-specific and vital articles within writing studies. We aim to work together to address knowledge inequities on Wikipedia as we create and contribute to these articles.

We want to highlight the #1Lib1Ref campaign going on right now. This is an easy way to get involved with Wikipedia editing by contributing one citation.

Other ways to participate:

Ask questions, get help and receive feedback on our discussion page.
Become a participant. See what other writing scholars are interested in working on.
Follow WikiProject Writing on Twitter:

Twitter

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello JayKatJay! Your additions to Composition studies have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 04:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello DanCherek, Thank you for explaining the copyright issue to me so clearly. It's true that I neglected to use quotation marks or cite the source of several of the sentences I added. I guess I was so focused on backing up the claims there with outside references for the sake of credibility that I somehow neglected to consider copyright concerns. I am relatively new at editing wikipedia, and I clearly missed the boat here and committed the type of plagiarism that I admonish my students to avoid. I would like to rewrite the section, being sure to adhere to the copyright rules and citing and paraphrasing accordingly. JayKatJay (talk) 02:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thank you for the explanation and for your understanding. Good luck with the article. DanCherek (talk) 17:57, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

If I understand correctly, this article is being edited by your students. It urgently needs some oversight, because it is becoming an essay full of OR and SYNTH and a lot of stuff is unsourced or otherwise unsuitable for this article. If something isn't done soon, I'll revert the article to the situation before your students started editing. Thanks. --Randykitty (talk) 08:51, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Randykitty, yes, I have three students working on the Peer review article. Thank you for raising your concerns with me. As near as I can tell, so far only MiaIsa5224 has made edits to the page. Are those the contributions that you are concerned about? I will be glad to provide or seek out help in providing the necessary oversight, as I would very much like for my students' contributions to stick, since they have worked hard to learn how to appropriately contribute to wikipedia and are excited about learning how to become members of the wikipedia community. JayKatJay (talk) 21:35, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Randykitty. OK, I made some adjustments to the section my student was editing on the Peer review page. Does it look any better to you now? I also reached out to the Wiki Edu expert assigned to my class to ask for further guidance on how I might provide more oversight to my students' contributions. I just wanted to let you know that I am working to address the concerns you have raised. JayKatJay (talk) 06:49, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but: no. The whole section "Pedagogical tool" reads like a term paper, not an encyclopedic article. Hopefully your wiki edu contact will be able to provide guidance. --Randykitty (talk) 08:30, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I received some guidance from my wiki edu contact today (who agreed with your assessment), and I have further revised the "Pedagogical tool" sub-section titled "Studies on using peer review in the classroom," (which is what my student contributed to the page) based on my understanding of the guidance that was offered thus far. Hopefully it is getting closer to reaching the established standards; I will continue to work on it until it does. JayKatJay (talk) 07:37, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's a start, that's good! But more needs to be done, for example the extensive use of primary sources and more unencyclopedic language ("John Doe in a large experiment found that...") --Randykitty (talk) 10:48, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all, Just hopping on here to say that I had a good conversation with @JayKatJay about the writing policies and guidelines for Wikipedia, specifically when it comes to this contribution. Thanks @Randykitty for pointing out specific areas for improvement, and please know that JayKatJay will be working to improve this. Thanks yall! Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:45, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First generation college student writing

Hello Dr Johnson, just noting I have nominated a page by one of your students for deletion, First generation college student writing. The issue is similar to that which Randykitty noted on peer review – the page is written as an essay rather than a Wikipedia article. – Teratix ₵ 14:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the head's up, Teratix. I appreciate your letting me know. I am watching closely the discussion about deleting it. I am open to revising it myself, and I just spent a few minutes trying to remove/replace some of the essayistic language in favor of a more encyclopedic tone. JayKatJay (talk) 06:40, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]