Talk:Produsage

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Sociology (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Internet culture (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Peer Review from Sara Lueders[edit]

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.

SaraLueders (talk) 04:12, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


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)