User talk:Julietabulie

Hi! Feel free to send me any messages so I know that I am doing this right!

Hi!

Welcome!

Hello, Julietabulie, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

FYI, you posted twice on Airplaneman's talk page. See the Page history. Cheers, →♠Gƒoley↔Four♣← 00:15, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

Hi Julie! This is in response to the email you sent Prof. Fine... To edit someone’s talk page, you can either click the “Edit” tab at the top of the page to edit it directly, or you can click the “New section” tab right next to it to start a new section on that page. Let me know if either of those are not working for you. Also, the Public Policy Initiative banner doesn’t get automatically added to your user page; for most people their Online Ambassadors have edited their user page to add the banner. I just added one to yours. Feel free to let me know if you have any more questions! Antony–22 (^talk⁄_contribs) 02:35, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Hey Julie,

I did see your post on my page so it did work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NasroF (talk • contribs) 18:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback on Potential Articles

Hi Julie. Nice working selecting possible articles. The two choices I like best are the two stub articles you selected--the seed and grain act or the hate crimes prevention act. The seed and grain act also includes some specific comments about work that needs to be done on the article, which you should find helpful. I love the media transparency article you selected and think it needs lots of work, but the topic will be more difficult. The concept of media transparency is very abstract and their are multiple definitions. I think the topic is more interesting but more difficult to do for this assignment. But if you really want to do it, go for it. The women's HIV study is also possible--it needs work on citations, development of findings or preliminary findings, description of methods, and description of the cohort. Marlenefine (talk) 20:45, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked the additional articles. The Industrial Hemp Farming Act seems a good choice--assuming there's more information about it. I don't know whether the bill was passed. Veteran's pension is too broad a topic, I think. My personal choice would be the Hate Crimes Prevention Act because it's a stub article, but the hemp article is fine too.Marlenefine (talk) 18:31, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Professor Fine,

I just wanted to let you know that I contacted the other person working on my article. I am currently waiting on a response. I will keep you updated on any changes I make (if I decide to stick with this one or pursue another). Thanks for all your input so far! Julietabulie (talk) 21:46, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I've been sorta MIA. Life is busy. Anyways, I read your post here and I think my job is to help make your life here easier. I also saw you created a sandbox at User:Julietabulie/Sandbox. I encourage you to experiment with fiddly coding and formatting there; it helps a lot. For references, it's ideal to add more than just a link. It should be formatted, like in a paper you would write. I encourage you to install Wikipedia:RefToolbar 2.0 which helps you fill out a template that produces formatted citations. As instructed at the linked page the code provided should be added to User:Julietabulie/vector.js. If you want, I can do it for you. These and many other user scripts are useful and make editing easier. For example, take a look at User:Airplaneman/vector.js for some stuff I use. Cheers, Airplaneman ✈ 15:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait... it's turned on by default. Heh. Check if you have a "cite" button as shown in this picture. Airplaneman ✈ 15:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I think I get it. Currently, I am just waiting on the other user editing the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2009 so I can decide where to go from there. So are you saying that I automatically have the citing template? Just a bit of clarification on that one. Julietabulie (talk) 17:20, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you should have the button for it. See the pic on the right; the cite tab is selected and gives you some options. If you don't see it let me know. You can try it out in your sandbox if you want to experiment; also remember that there is a preview page button to use before saving (it's to the right of the save page button) which is useful for seeing what your changes look like. So basically the tool lets you fill out fields in a form and it will spit out the coding for you, which saves you a headache or two. Airplaneman ✈ 23:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Airplaneman! Sorry I took so long getting back to you. Thanks for all your advice so far. However, I don't think I have the template. It is not in my sandbox and it is not on my "tab"?(I guess you could call it that) when I try editing Wikipedia article references. I tried snagging a template from somewhere else, (aka cutting and pasting a reference from another source and then filling in the applicable information) but it failed miserably. Also, just so you know, I have decided to pursue the Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2009. Thanks! Julietabulie (talk) 03:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Julie—take your time in responding (but do keep up with assignment deadlines!) I understand that in real life we're both busy and may not have time to answer each others' questions right away. I'll keep an eye on your selected article; so you're collaborating with someone else on it? (Awesome—the more hands the better :D) Sorry if I'm confusing you with the whole citation template thing. Just to make sure: you don't see a "templates" drop-down menu with the word "templates" below the icons that add bold and italic text as pictured to the right? Airplaneman ✈ 05:19, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Airplaneman- just got back from spring break. To answer your question- no, I do not have a "templates" on my drop down menu. For now I will just cite it APA or MLA. I am not too worried about citations. I am going to start writing the article in my sandbox shortly. From there I am sure things will start coming together. Julietabulie (talk) 21:10, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mkay sounds good. Airplaneman ✈ 14:10, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Partners in Crime

Hi Julie, no need to worry; I would be thrilled to have you help me with this topic. I tend to look at the page at least every other day, so any additions or changes you make I'll be sure to review. I hope you can do the same for me. I've been searching for reliable and relevant source for a week or so now, however, having a fresh pair of eyes will be nice. Also - if you want - I can give you my email address so you can communicate with me whenever you need to. If you're comfortable just chatting on the talk pages that works too. Either way, just let me know, I'm eager to help. Pietrogpjmu (talk) 19:28, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article feedback

Hey Julie, it looks like the preparations in your sandbox are coming together. One question - how are you going to integrate what's in your sandbox to what's already in Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2009? If you put the two together, I think the article will be improved twofold at least. I know formatting is hard; I'll go through and help with that so you can just focus on writing. Airplaneman ✈ 14:13, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! I was actually just going to message you. My sandbox is kind of a mess right now. Most of the writing is scattered ideas and the format is, well, not formatted. I am going to expand more and edit some things out and also format in the next week. It will be going up fairly soon and I still have quite a bit of work to do. Any ideas on how I can expand my article a bit more? I am thinking of expanding the pros and cons section, but after that I'm not really sure where to go. Anything you think I need to change in my sandbox (writing wise) or anything I should expand on? I know it is very rough, but any ideas would be greatly appreciated! Thanks. Julietabulie (talk) 19:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be quite busy for the next few weeks, so I'll have to budget my wiki-time. When is the due date? I'll try to drop in a few times before then to help out.
Right now, I'll move the citations into place where you state they are needed (that's called inline citations).
Also, by working the notes into prose, you'll add more depth to the article.
Make sure you haven't copied (or even closely paraphrased) from any sources. Copyright violations are a big problem and can't be posted (they will be deleted).
As for expansion, try looking for sources detailing the reaction from people of both parties and the general public's reception of the bill (good places to check are news websites, which may have reports on the bill. Try to shy away from primary sources, such as the party websites of the people behind the bill, e.g. Ron Paul's site - it's not prohibited, but it's bound to be inherently biased).
Pros and cons sections are good for analytical papers, but may not be the best for an encyclopedic entry. I think it' be better to just keep a "history" section detailing the bill further. This presents the information in a neutral manner (with good sources of course) and allows readers to decide pros and cons for themselves.
If I'm not responding fast enough to your queries, you can always email me. Airplaneman ✈ 14:07, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Julie, you might also want to take a look at other articles on US legislation, like Matthew Shepard Act and Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009. One area where you could expand is the origins and historical events that preceded the bills proposal. (For one example, the bill would repeal parts of existing laws. What do those laws currently mandate, and what was the reason they were put in place?) Dominic·t 14:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome ideas all around. Thanks so much guys. I am probably going to finish it up tomorrow and post it. I can always go back and fix things up. I also know that it will inevitably be changed and added onto, I just wanted to help fix it up a bit, so I'm not trying to make it perfect. Thanks so much for your input. If either of you have any free time tomorrow feel free to check out what I'm doing and add anymore commentary. (I will start working on it more around 1:30). Thanks so much for all your help!! Julietabulie (talk) 03:36, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've done some good work, Julie. In fact, if you can add another couple of paragraphs within a few days, you'll likely be able to qualify for the "Did you know" section on the main page. My main suggestion would be to try to incorporate more independent secondary sources—namely news articles— instead of relying so much on the primary-source text and interest groups. You might want to try searching in LexisNexis. For example, I took a look just now, and when I run a search for "Industrial Hemp Farming Act" (in quotes) and limit it to only dates after 2008, and change the source to "All news" from "Major world publications," I pulled up a lot of useful news articles and editorials. There might be more sources if you try some other searching on your own, too. Remember, you have 5 days from when you first edited the article to get it ready for DYK. For now, just try to expand it a little more to meet the length requirement (you are about four-fifths to where you need to be) and Airplaneman can help you with the nomination. Dominic·t 04:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Julie, I'm going out in a few minutes but have one major suggestion: for "The Bill" section, explain what the Bill entails, but don't quote (all of) the text directly. It would be fine to have some quotes, but a huge block of quoted text doesn't help much in explaining what the Bill is. Dominic offers extremely useful suggestions (thanks Dominic!) and a really good place to search for high-quality references. An example of a more filled-out article is Removal of cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act. Although you don't need to make it as substantial as that (that would be a good target if you keep working on it outside of class though), the format is a good reference to follow. Is there a due date for this project? Keep it up :) Airplaneman ✈ 23:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message

I've left a suggestion for requesting feedback at Talk:Industrial Hemp Farming Act of 2009. Donald Albury 12:38, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see your request for feedback worked. I'm glad my suggestion worked. -- Donald Albury 00:52, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback reply

Posted here: Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback/2011_April_15#Industrial_Hemp_Farming_Act_of_2009. MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:38, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]