|WikiProject Sociology||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Internet culture||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
|This page was nominated for deletion on June 16 2009. The result of the discussion was delete.|
|A fact from Produsage appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 7 December 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: "Did you know Wikipedia:Recent additions/2012/December. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Produsage.||
Peer Review from Sara Lueders
CONTENT CLARITY - I feel that the overall clarity of your paper is good. There are some sentences where I feel that you got a bit "wordy". For example, the sentence "The concept blurs the boundaries between passive consumption and active production and the distinction between producers and consumers or users of content has faded, as users also play the role of producers whether they are aware of this role or not" I feel could be reworded to either be 2 shorter sentences or using different vocabulary.
SUBSTANCE - One of my main suggestions would be to expand on your examples section. Even adding one or two more sentances per example I feel would really expand your article and would also give readers an even better example of what produsage is.
STRUCTURE/ORGANIZATION - I think the structure of your article is one of the best aspects of it. I feel that is is broken down in a really easy way for people to understand. Like I mentioned earlier, expanding on the "examples section" would add to the article.
Content: Good Introduction, I like the way your definition, explanation of the term are very clear and comprehensive. You divide the matter into sub sections which is a good way to organize the matter, this will also make it easier for the audience to understand what you're getting at. Other than the occasional jargon, good sense of style, clear, concise matter.
Structure: Easy to read, adding some examples could help, what about criticism or how has produsage been thought of people other than Axel Bruns?
Sources: References are varied, you are off to a good start here. Why not talk more about how Axel Bruns propagated this term- any applications- if it has any. I think you could easily go bolder with the sources and expand not limiting yourself to the term itself, in fact looking at its application over a broader spectrum. Overall good job! --Sanyad23 (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)