User talk:Lianalopez711/sandbox

Week 2

I am worried about your work, Liana: you only critiqued an article for this week, which was half the assignment posted. What happened to your answers on the content gap, which should have gone on your sandbox page? What is more, your evaluation of the Hebert page was very meager and insufficient. All you did was agree with the person before you. Please take more time to complete your assignment correctly and fully in the future. Alfgarciamora (talk) 20:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Week 4

-Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why? Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information because they offer biased and sometimes even unprofessional opinions rather than completely proven and researched facts. -What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company? I would not use a company's website for information about that company because that website would only highlight all of its positive and maybe even exaggerated attributes rather than true and accurate facts about the company. -What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism? Plagiarism is claiming someone's work as your own; however, copyright violation is when someone's work is used without the author's permission. -What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism? Good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism include the use of quotation marks and the citation of sources. Lianalopez711 (talk) 02:44, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Week 5

I have assigned myself the article written on Jacques Hébert because that is my character in class. Upon reading his Wikipedia page, I noticed two different errors: incorrect information and not enough information. For example, he is listed as a member of the Jacobin Faction, and although he does strongly support the Jacobin Faction, Hébert does not belong to any faction as he is simply a crowd leader. There is also a severe lack of information on his early life, his written work, and his religious beliefs or lack thereof. In editing this article, I plan to really go in depth on these topics so as to ensure that readers will be able to find any and all information on Hébert.

What's missing from the current article: ·Information on his family ·Completely accurate information on his political affiliation ·More in-depth information on his written work such as small excerpts from his newspaper and names and excerpts of other written works by Hébert Lianalopez711 (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Week 6

-What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"? I think Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality" is great. Wikipedia defines a neautral point of view as fair and balanced facts from a reliable source that show no editorial bias. To me, this seems like a good, simple, and understandable definition to describe neutrality and its importance within Wikipedia. -What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information? When using Wikipedia, one must be extremely careful. Wikipedia is a great way to get quick and easy information so as to understand a concept, but it may not be the best source if one is looking for completely accurate and reliable information. This is because anyone that wants to can edit an artcile regardless of their level of expertise. For this reason, someone could post incorrect information to the website without anyone else noticing. -On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create? This excludes magazine articles and any other opinion-based sources. That would cause a problem because it would show biased and inaccurate information. -If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now? If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, its content would surely be different. For one thing, there would be a lot less information than there is now. Also, the information would most likely be slightly less accurate. At that time, sources and ways to get to those sources were scarce. It would have been a lot more common for someone to post inaccurate information based on word of mouth rather than true, researched, factual information. However, if Wikipedia was written 100 years from now, the information would definitely be more accurate. 100 years into the future, there will probably be a way for Wikipedia to test a poster's level of expertise before inaccurate information would be posted. Lianalopez711 (talk) 02:45, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Draft

Lead Section

Jacques René Hébert (French: [ebɛʁ]; 15 November 1757 – 24 March 1794) was a French journalist and the founder and editor of the extremely radical newspaper Le Père Duchesne during the French Revolution.[1] He was a leader of the French Revolution and had thousands of followers known as Hébertists or Hébertistes.

In this section, I changed what information would be included in the lead section of the article.

Early Life

Jacques René Hébert was born on 15 November 1757 in Alençon, to goldsmith, former trial judge, and deputy consul Jacques Hébert (died 1766) and Marguerite Beunaiche de Houdrie (1727–1787). Jacques-René Hébert studied law at the College of Alençon and went into practice as a clerk in a solicitor of Alençon, at which time he was ruined by a lawsuit against a Dr. Clouet. Hébert fled first to Rouen and then to Paris. For a while he passed through a difficult financial time and lived through the support of a hairdresser in rue des Noyers. There he found work in a theater, la République, where he wrote plays in his spare time, but these were never produced. He was fired for stealing. He then entered the service of a doctor. It is said he lived through expediency and scams.

In 1789, he began his writing with a pamphlet "la Lanterne magique ou le Fléau des Aristocrates" (Magic Lantern, or Scourge of Aristocrats). He published a few booklets. In 1790, he attracted attention through a pamphlet he published, and became a prominent member of the club of the Cordeliers in 1791.

In, this section, I merely fixed some grammatical errors. I plan to expand on some topics covered in this section, but I haven't been able to do that yet.

Political Party

He was not necessarily a part of any faction. Hébert discovered who he was through the Revolution. He aligned himself with and agreed with most of the ideals of the radical Jacobin faction; however, he was not a member of the faction.

I added more accurate information regarding his political affiliation.

Père Duchesne

In his newspaper, Le Père Duchesne, Hébert did not use himself as the prime example of the Revolution. He used a mythical character called the Père Duchesne to be able to relay his message in a more subtle way. He was already well-known by the people of Paris and only wanted his his message to be received directly and clearly by his followers and not his enemies. Père Duchesne was a very strong, outspoken character with extremely high emotions. He constantly felt great anger but also would experience great happiness. He was never afraid to fully display exactly how he was feeling. He would constantly use foul language and other harsh words to express himself.

I wanted to add this paragraph to the section on Wikipedia called "Père Duchesne" because I felt that the actual writings and themes that Hébert explored were not necessarily covered in-depth in the Wikipedia article.

Week 10

Many writers and journalists at the time were greatly influenced by the proclamation of martial law on October 21, 1789. It envoked various questions and patterns of Revolutionary thinking and inspired various forms of writing such as Le Père Duchesne. The law prompted multiple interpretations all of which led to what became essential Revolutionary ideals.

I added this small paragraph to the section called Père Duchesne.