User talk:TutyFruity
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, TutyFruity, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; 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
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 00:42, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Hi! I like your username! Exceptionally almindelig (talk) 02:11, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review of Archaeology of Central Africa
[edit]Hi TutyFruity, I saw what you wrote on the talk page of the article and I like your division of topics that you will eventually cover. You have a great start so far explaining the opinions of others about the research done in this area but, that is not really what wikipedia is about. We as writers are supposed to read the sources to try to pick out facts and not guesses about why something may have happened. For example, this sentence "Joseph Conrad's description of "green hell" is reminiscent of the attitude held by many concerning this part of Africa." You are trying to make this sound like a research paper by getting fancy with your words and sentence structure which is not necessary for wikipedia. The point is to state the facts in a way that is short and to the point and that sometimes means pretty dry. This sentence is too much about what Joseph Conrad thinks instead of what the area is really like, we need to get rid of bias. I would recommend: 1) taking your voice and other voices out of the article and just state the findings/facts. 2) putting better captions with your pictures to better explain what they are and why they are on the page. 3) talk more about specific famous sites that were excavated in Central Africa.
Overall, I like your article, just try to make it more informational and less creative. MatildaStar (talk) 01:09, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Peer Review
[edit]Your article has a great start! The divisions of sections you have flows nicely. One thing that MatildaStar and your page say is that it is not written like a wikipedia article. I would say write like the results page of a scientific paper. At least that is how I have been thinking and it has helped me. I also think that the "Why so few people have researched here" section should maybe go after the other sections of the article. One thing I thought was missing was a description of famous sites found in the area. Where are they, what was found there, etc. One last think I saw was the reference to the people who did the research. Although it is important to give them credit for the work they have done, I think it is not best suited to be in the text as you have it. Overall this is a good start and I can't wait to see the final product!
Afg110 (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Afg110Afg110 (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Welcome
[edit]Hello TutyFruity, how'd the first couple weeks of class go for you?DaFlyingFishmonger (talk) 22:49, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Article feedback
[edit]
Excellent start on your article Archaeology of Central Africa. Another editor has added a tag regarding their concerns that "the article is written like a personal reflection or opinion essay". The Editing Wikipedia brochure can help you with editing the article to more closely reflect an encyclopedia entry. For example, you might consider changing the header "Why few have researched here", which appears to advocate a position, to a more neutral and general header like "Archaeological research". Please let me know if you have any questions. Rob (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:01, 28 November 2016 (UTC)