Phils+Analysis+and+Reflection

=Phil's Analysis and Reflection Page=

This page currently is under construction.

Contributions
Please note that as per in-tutorial instructions, I'm not listing any graphic, spelling, editing or minor text additions. Only contributions of more than 150 words or milestone events are listed here. I've been looking through everyone elses contributions section, and I'm a little confused. I originally had my items done by date, and mentioned some pages I'd done smaller edits on as well. After a tutorial for 333 in which Prof. Jones said "don't list grammer and spelling mistakes in your analysis page" I decided I would not. I changed to this format, and stopped noting anything under 150 words (which was a good deal of my edits, I discuss that below in my reflections section). Now I've done that I see anyone else with a reflection page has my old style, and is including smaller edits! I checked the A2 page and in fact it does say that. Well I figure your spreadsheet will show you, but I've been in 4 major wikis this year (300, 333, and project pages for both) and finished last year with about 150 edits. I now have over 500. I did 37 on the 333 project wiki, and 43 on my 300 project wiki. So that's about 300 edits over 2 wikis. That means i've done about 150 edits each wiki. So when you see how small my list is compared to some other people, keep that in mind :)

>
 * GUI page - added extensive content, and pictures while correcting grammar and spelling
 * Command Line Interfaces - started (and finished) this page, pretty comprehensive I think...
 * edited and added to data mining correcting many factual inaccuracies
 * Added a nice section to the google page on why they're the current leaders.
 * Did all the surveys on the survey pages (wow that took a while!)

Reflections
Addendum: I suppose I should explain why this isn't the same text as 300, when I assert that I copy/pasted from this page on that site and do a long, drawn out explanation. Originally I copy/pasted my text from this one to the 300 one, but I've since changed and added to this one. So is the nature of wikis. I'm trying hard to edit stuff up all over the place, and I think I have a page for 300 now... 333 should be easier (update: yup.. definately got my pages ;), and I've had a lot of work to do besides wikis, so I haven't done the hard research I'd want to do before writing my pages (update: 3 days worth of research.. I was going to attach a screen shot but it's pretty massive, as I have a dual screen setup, it wouldn't take into account the 8 books I flipped through in the library and besides, you probably don't care. Basically though, I had about 35 different links open in 2 different firefox browsers). We're really starting to get some good editing in now, with tons of people fixing, changing, adding every day. The funny thing is that no matter how much that goes on, and even with people who don't do any research and just go and fix grammar, there's always more you can fix, more you can change and so there's really no excuse to not doing a bunch of edits here. I now have (as of 12:53 AM Nov. 14th) 416 edits, when at the end of 205 I had 108. This gives me 308 edits to date this year, spread over cct300, 333, and my two separate wiki pages for their associated projects. I'm thus up to 77 edits per wiki (308 / 4) and I'm not even close to done; of course, quality is better than quantity, but I've had some pretty strong edits in those numbers, so I think I'm doing pretty well. As I go on to say below, I do enjoy this project. > >
 * 1) I'm writing this having done the 205 wiki last year; I also am an avid editor of wikipedia for the past 2-3 years: I feel like a bit of a wiki pro. Things started out more slowly this year than last, not only because my wiki time has been split over 4 times the amount of wikis, but because i've also had a number of other projects on the go at the same time that were not as time consuming last year. I've been speaking with friends about this format lately, and it's surprising how many of them tell me how much they hate the format. I'm constantly seeing 0 edits, or only a few grammatical edits here and there; the quality of the pages done only by one person are generally low. It's funny, I think people have a better time showing up other people's shoddy work than putting up work in the first place. It seems like someone will put up generally bad work, then someone will come by and update it, fixing some problems. Not to be outdone, and feeling a little embarrassed by shame, the original author will then spruce up the page. Their efforts will be extended by half a dozen mini-modifiers like myself who go in and change a grammar mistake here, a spelling error there, and occasionally a paragraph or sentance in need of revision. At the end of the day you have something that started out in poor affairs turn in to a real article, and almost by accident! As I said in my 300 wiki posting, I didn't think i'd learn a lot about wikis, but I was wrong. That entire reflection above came about (in almost the same accidental way as it describes) from my recent work and observations. I happen to feel that learning is more important than paper, more important than a professor standing up and quickly rattling off the items written on the overhead behind him (not singling you out Jones, just saying in general). I think wikis add to learning, because they achieve a certain involvement that is not just a gimmick, but a full requirement to real learning. So often our schools teach us that something is so, but leave it to us to believe that is the truth. Like sheep I say, and for shame. How many of us can prove that the earth is round? We know it to be so only because we're told that, and we laugh, scornfully at the fools of the past who would think the earth flat, men who accepted what they too had been told without question and without involvement or judgment of their own. Wikis at the best of times change us from sheep to participants, from accepting what we're told to finding evidence to back those assertions up and thinking about what we put down as 'fact' and 'fiction'. So what will I contribute to wikis? Whatever I can and whenever I have the time. This is more about what wikis contribute back to us - our own . People challenge wikipedia, saying that it often contains wrongs, and to them I say search out what you think are wrong, and fix them, and then you've added not only to everyone else's knowledge, but to your own as well, as your assumptions have been challenged and found to be on solid footing. Understanding wikis in such a way, I think we can see that a lot of what I do, and a lot of what other people do, is really the most important part of wikis - search out and destroy mistakes and inaccuracy small and large, and at the end of the day that might just be more important than writing the original article itself.
 * 1) I usually contribute to and change postings that I run across that have some sort of obvious mistake. Once I'm there, I'll often start doing more, researching the topic, changing paragraphs, etc. I like adding to and editing / redoing other peoples work - that's really the point of a wiki. Some people don't get that, but then again wikis aren't for everyone. I don't usually check my own work for modifications, and I enjoy it when someone comes in and fixes something I've half done and come back to. If someone thinks there's a problem with my work, I'd be happy for them to try and fix it. If it's not as good as what I did, then a quick check of the history will show that; if it is better, then they've helped me and the community. I don't often check back on what I do though, I just do it until it doesn't interest me anymore, and move on. Usually 'doesn't interest me anymore' means 'long, grammatically accurate and good looking', while probably leaving some room for improvements. I often see others do the same, though without the latter focus on accuracy, and this just leaves a bigger space for the rest of us to clean up (and get more marks in the process). The thing is editing is strangely fun. I feel like I'm adding to a little world, and when this course is over we'll have made a real and interesting 'encyclopedia'. The other reason that it feels more like play than work to edit is because I usually only edit things that interest me, which means that I'm actually learning or writing about something I have some idea about or want to have a greater knowledge of. That's incredibly important to the process.
 * 2) I'm reading the text I wrote above, and well I think I put it well. I'd say I still have the same outlook en mass, aside from a slight problem I've had which is the large amount of work this semester has entailed. It has pushed this assignment down on the totem pole for me, and i'm sure for others, and I found it interesting to see how that changed my editing style and use of the wiki. Last year I used it for study notes, edited massive sections, etc. This year I had several issues. 1. there were multiple (read: 4 instead of 1 last year) wikis I was working on at the same time, so my efforts were extremely divided. 2. With less time edits tended to be more superficial (grammar and spelling, changing and adding sentances rather than changing and editing paragraphs) and quick. I believe my edits are just as numerous on a per wiki basis (i'm seeing about 100 edits per wiki average) but the edits themselves weren't as good. Suggestions? Not so much wikis next year. Rather than having us do a full wiki spot of our own for our projects, perhaps have us do a page and integrate our stuff into the course wikis. Why? Because that will refocus our efforts on the specific class wiki rather than dividing them, meaning our posts will be more productive and meaningful. I know, I know, you see problems: maybe our pages will overlap (we can't all have a page entitled "group resume" after all). With proper constraints though these could be properly labelled. Certain items in their projects could even be improved or commented upon by other members of the class - or not. As for what I found most helpful about using the wiki? In addition to the 4 course related wikis, my friends and I set up a studying wiki for 333 which proved helpful for the test (I think! we'll see when I get back my mark!). Like I said, the division in wikis meant I was spending less time reading and using each wiki and more time running around, and I feel this could definately be minimised by the suggestion I outline above.