User:Mango Masala/NMAC 5108 Journal
This page in a nutshell. This journal is a requirement for course NMAC 5108.
March 10, 2019 First Post ==
For my first journal posting, I will admit to my immediate agitation with Wikipedia. Creating this sub page shouldn't have been frustrating, but each step was filled with doubt and anxiety. I hope my comfort level increases as this journal develops and as we progress with our Wikipedia assignments. Like most, I have used Wikipedia as a resource for general knowledge (to settle the occasional bet or row), but had not considered editing articles myself or that an open editing model existed (as described here).
I plan to reference "Writing Top Ten” by Gerald Lucas often and will incorporate point 4 - be precise - as my writing mantra; presenting information in a succinct, effective manner is my personal goal for this course. I’m looking forward to working with different creative platforms, and am encouraged by Lucas’s prompt to strive for diverse and inspired visual representations to words. To support creative, not clichéd writing, Carroll urges readers to resist laziness by avoiding clichés like those listed on (13) and others like heart of gold, free as a bird, frightened to death, bent out of shape, at wit’s end, heard it through the grape vine, kiss of death (exercise 1.5). Eliminate unnecessary clichés, metaphors, and similes allows for richer, more precise content (Carroll 12). The Editing Wikipedia brochure offers practical and detailed information for creating and editing content; I’ll reference it frequently alongside the Evaluating Wikipedia resource. Additionally, I look to learn from classmates and other Wikipedia contributors. Here’s to a successful course!
Carroll, Brian (2014). Writing & Editing for Digital Media. New York: Routledge. pp. 3-56.
Lucas, Gerald (2019). "Writing Top Ten". Gerald Lucas. Retrieved 2019-3-10.
Wikipedia.org (2019). Editing Wikipedia. Retrieved 2019-3-7.
Wikipedia.org (2019). Evaluating Wikipedia. Retrieved 2019-3-7.
- love the Mango Masala handle, Mariam! All I can say is I hope that it's ok that we don't always resist the laziness that Carroll urges us away from, at least not in our journals. I just read back over one of mine and I can see the metaphors and similes piling up. Here's to another productive term. Feel free to really call me out when you see me not following those rules Carroll laid out in our articles. I could really use a good swift kick in the right direction!
- @Mango Masala: Hi friend from last class. If you want to collaborate or have professional discourse, email me at firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com. I was frustrated at first too, but what Dr. Lucas said on my original post, post everyday, and I have tried (not everyday but trying multiple posts using multiple functions) it has gotten easier. My favorite new thing I've learned is adding emoticons []..(Dmcgonagill (talk) 20:22, 11 March 2019 (UTC))
March 17, 2019 Norris Church Mailer==
I expected (and was hoping for) a lengthier entry for Norris Church Mailer, but the entry did provide a (very) brief overview of her life. The headers were clear and the copy succinct, but I wouldn't consider it a robust view of her life or achievements. I was disappointed by the lack of a full list of her published works. As there are only three works cited, perhaps Norris was rather private. Or, as we are learning from this course, potential contributors need to dig further into her works and legacy. I did a quick Google search of Norris -- what a stunning woman! I'm sure her memoir does not want for drama. From my brief readings about Norman Mailer, he seemed to have exuded an irresistible charm, intelligence, and wit
about him. He couldn't have been a dull fella to have been married six times.
Good...I think I'm citing correctly!
- @Mango Masala: Mariam, perfect description of the entry. It was not at all robust and kinda left me feeling like, hmm, either this writer isn't that interested in Norris Church Mailer or she must not have had much going on in her life worth telling, but surely that isn't true. Looks like we're going to have to do some digging and fill in some blanks!