User talk:Nanodudek

Your submission at Articles for creation: Request for Applications (December 29)

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Request for Applications.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Request for Applications concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Request for Applications, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Request for Applications

Hello Nanodudek. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Request for Applications".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Request for Applications}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Rankersbo (talk) 10:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Thanks for your interest in doing campus outreach. It is possible for new users to teach Wikipedia even with limited experience but historically, new users in that role have not enjoyed the outcomes.

The bar for getting the userright is low. Some common expectations are proof of having thoughtfully edited an article, some experience in having conversations on Wikipedia, and knowledge about where to go for assistance if you need help.

I certainly want more science-minded people feeling supported on Wikipedia, and I want you to be aware that people are around to assist you. Consider saying hello at Wikipedia:WikiProject Science or anywhere else that interests you to talk about engagement. Message me if you like - I do health content here as well as outreach to universities.

You said you do grant writing. A trend in university grants is proof of dissemination of outcomes, and Wikipedia is a great way to get metrics of distributed content. If you are considering leveraging Wikipedia as a distribution channel then that could be beneficial for grants you mentor, and Wikipedia, and there is the option for your university to get grants from the Wikimedia Foundation to do wiki-workshops if it ever comes to that.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:36, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see my faculty colleagues and our students contribute to wikipedia, and dissemination of grant outcomes by improving wikipedia articles is one way to do that. I also want them to improve their writing, and getting them to contribute to wikipedia and the international audience is one way to do that. I decided that I should start with our university libraries' faculty and staff and tinker with wikipedia on the side. It seems like a hard community to break into! 2001:468:C80:8104:4D8E:4FF9:5403:A81B (talk) 19:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)nanodudek — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:468:C80:8104:4D8E:4FF9:5403:A81B (talk) 19:04, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nanodudek,

It's great that you want to see more people at Virginia Tech contribute to Wikipedia. Are you familiar with the Wiki Education Foundation? We provide support for teachers and students in the US and Canada as they work on Wikipedia in class. On our website you can find some of the materials we've developed for teaching and learning. Among the various resources available are online training modules designed specifically for instructors and students. We can also provide staff support: a classroom program manager to help instructors, librarians and others in teaching roles; content experts to provide guidance to students before/after contributing content. If you're interested, I'm happy to talk about the program, but the person you'll want to be in touch with is Helaine (Wiki Ed) (helaine [at] wikiedu [dot] org). She's the classroom program manager and can even get you some brochures to hand out to instructors about our program.

PS: By disseminating grant outcomes do you mean editing articles to reflect findings of grant-funded research? --Ryan (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:06, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ryan, thanks for those resources. I think those brochures will be helpful. By dissemination, one aspect that I mean is that after a grant supported research study is published, the students and faculty would update the topic in wikipedia and cite the publication. But, they can also contribute while the research is ongoing by composing new and unique concept diagrams, debating theory on the talk pages, and improving articles. There is a lot that they can do besides the traditional scientific communication channels (journal articles, power point presentations at conferences, etc.) Nanodudek (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2015 (UTC)nanodudek[reply]