User talk:Rekjlhoya

Hi! Doing a wiki project forgot the tildesSpringaling17 (talk) 03:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Smithsonian Institution Archives Edit-a-Thon and Meetup!

Who should come? You should. Really.
	She Blinded Me with Science: Smithsonian Women in Science Edit-a-Thon will be held on Friday, March 30, 2012 at the Smithsonian Archives in Washington, D.C. This edit-a-thon will focus on improving and writing Wikipedia content about women from the Smithsonian who contributed to the sciences. It will be followed by a happy hour meetup! We look forward to seeing you there!

...and if you do not live in the Washington, D.C. area, please forgive the intrusion and you can delete this invite! Sarah (talk) 04:45, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on your sandbox work

Hi there, answering your question to Buggie since he may be unavailable to reply. Here are some thoughts on your work thus far. First, did you check out the talk page of the Race and Sports article? The article you chose is definitely on the controversial side of the spectrum, so be forewarned that your work may be more about arguing your point in the talk section than just making an edit. Anyway, there is quite a lot of interesting back-and-forth going on there, and one of the big topics discussed is the black athletic superiority topic.

So, a couple of things. A few things you've suggested including may be citable, but that doesn't mean they won't be heavily debated, especially the Jay Coakley genetic explanations material, which you might do better to introduce like "Offering some points to support the stance that black athletes are superior in sports, sociologist Jay Coakley asserted that…" Do you notice how the slight changes in language move the statement toward a more neutral one? By saying "summarized the explanations," you suggest in an unspoken way that the genetic explanations are uncontested as he interprets them. Finally, since your topic is clearly an active and controversial one, you should be prepared for possible Wikipedia argument in the talk section over the content you add, or possibly even flagging or deletion. Just be prepared for the possibility (if it happens, it's all part of the experience!), but try to avoid it by being as neutral in your reporting as you can be! Sleuthwood (talk) 15:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback from Rob

This is a good start, although you need to be careful about the second paragraph under “Black athletic superiority.”

You need to provide more context for Coakley’s points, especially because you are closely paraphrasing from an book (“The New Plantation”) that includes Coakley’s summarization to argue a point. Why does Hawkins include Coakley’s work in his book? The way you set up that paragraph doesn’t make it clear that Hawkins is arguing that genetic explanations for black superiority in sport—and over-emphasis on physical ability in general—”minimizes our contributions” (p. 65). You might move the last sentence in that paragraph (“Billy Hawkins argues ...”) to the beginning of the paragraph; that might make it clearer that (a) Hawkins is quoting Coakley and (b) Hawkins is using Coakley’s quote to make a point.

Also, it’s unnecessary to use “renowned” when describing Jay Coakley. You can just describe him as a “sports sociologist.”

–Pongr (talk) 07:07, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Rekjlhoya, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Sarah (talk) 17:00, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Education Program Student Survey

Hi! Please take a few minutes to fill out this survey about the Wikipedia Education Program. This is our opportunity to improve the program and resources we provide students, so your feedback and input is integral to our future success. Thank you so much! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 23:17, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]