|This article is/was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q1. Further details are available on the course page.|
|WikiProject Blogging||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mobile blogging article.|
|This page was nominated for deletion on November 18, 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep.|
"never heard of moblog b4"
Never heard of a moblog b4, very new to me. New, but also very weird and different. And i have been using the web consistently for over 8 years. Never seen the word ever.. I believe someone has Blended this word together, to make some new word, that doesnt really ever need using!!
Jevon, the word "moblog," while a relatively recent neologism (2002?) returns over 8,000,000 hits on Google. Vote for reversion to original page.
I second the reversion to the original page; "Moblog" is a deeply accepted term and has not only myriad dedicated sites for just this purpose but there are profound and varied moblog specific examples and stories which warrant a moblog only page —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4lfie (talk • contribs) 11:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed that tag, as two references from BBC News, and another as early as 2003 from Sun, seem to satisfy the reliable sources requirement. If you don't concur with this, state so in this section, and explain, please. Thanks! -- David Spalding (☎ ✉ ✍) 22:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Planned revisions for the page
We plan on adding information regarding the development of mobile blogs, design, applications that focus on mobile blogging and including challenges that accompany mobile blogging. Sasuss1130 (talk) 17:57, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
SI 110 Reviewer
Overall, this page was greatly improved since the Wikipedia project was started. All of the elements that make a quality article were addressed. First, The lead section is clear and understandable, detailing what mobile blogging is, as well as informing the audience where this method of blogging currently stands. Secondly, The coverage is neutral and balanced, as it provides not only the advantages of mobile blogging, but also the challenges. Finally, the structure is clear and the page uses reliable sources. However, I still would have liked to see examples of how the product is used. What is the most popular way to mobile blog? How has technology developed around mobile blogging? These are just a few of the questions I would have liked to be answered. Yet, this page is still very informative and unbiased. Good work!
Overall, the group significantly improved and lengthened the article. The lead section makes the definition of mobile blogging clearer and provides a brief history of mobile blogging’s popularity. The lead section also summarizes how mobile blogging is an umbrella topic to many different types of mobile blogging. The article is easy to follow and people can easily find what they are looking for within the article. The author used many headings to separate by theme and subheadings to organize the main points. The structuring of the article makes it is easy to read and understand mobile blogging. The authors included both the advantages and disadvantages of mobile blogging yet kept the article neutral in its coverage. The group added many reliable sources to the article which furthers its credibility. The article might have been improved on if the authors had provided a few more sentences about mobile blogging’s recreational uses. For example, what is mobile blogging most used for and some statistics on the most used mobile blogging platforms.
This article has been greatly improved. The first section clearly defines mobile blogging and everything included is relevant and informative. The titles for the sections following are apt and also relevant. The article is impartial and unbiased, and many sources were added. I would only suggest adding more information, specifically on the development of mobile blogging over time - what are the successful mobile blogging platforms and have they changed since the moblogs began? What has changed on the moblog platforms between the when moblogs were launched and now, if anything? Ksierrab (talk) 02:36, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Overall, I think this group did a great job of improving the article, Mobile Blogging. The original description at the beginning of the article is clear and concise, giving a nice overview of what Mobile Blogging is and what the article will address. Particularly, I liked how they explained the change in usage from 2006 to the present, and highlighted the differing amounts of teen and adult bloggers. Additionally, the group did a good job of dividing the article into sections with various sub-headers. The first section on the history of “moblogging” provides important background information to the topic. However, I thought this section could have been expanded more because I think it is important to understand how mobile blogging has expanded and changed over time. In the Design section of the article, they made good use of bullet points to clearly and concisely highlight the key principles. I especially like how they provided specific advantages and disadvantages, demonstrating their neutral viewpoint on the topic. The section on advantages gives some specific applications of mobile blogging, such as the educational and tourism uses. I think these examples really help to better explain the topic and the implications of mobile blogging, so more examples would have improved the article. I also think the external links throughout the article to other Wikipedia pages help explain some specific terms, and greatly improve the quality of the article. There are several different references provided, which helps to verify the reliability of the information. Though there could be some minor changes to improve the article, I think this group did a great job altering the original stub article and created a very organized and informative page about Mobile Blogging.
Blacklisted Links Found on Mobile blogging
Cyberbot II has detected links on Mobile blogging which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
- Triggered by
\bcandidwriter\.com\bon the local blacklist
- Triggered by
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.