User talk:Caleylynch4

Hi Caley! Just testing this out. Michelle.K.Rico (talk) 21:46, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Test

Thank you so much!

Mentor[edit]

I will certainly be your mentor, I am going to add a template to your userpage so you can contact me more easily, but here is very good too. Remember, when you make a comment on a discussion page, remember to sign with ~~~~ which leaves your user id and a time stamp on the discussion so we know when you commented. Always feel free to contact me, and if you could activate the e-mail preference in your user preferences. For more information about that see WP:E-mail. Happy editing, and I look forward to this semester! Sadads (talk) 22:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK thank you. It took me awhile to figure out how to respond to you, sorry. I activated the email settings but I don't know how to access my email... Caleylynch4 (talk) 19:27, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Generally we respond at the bottom of discussion in the relevant section so that someone new to the conversation can read down the page and learn what the communication was about. I also sent you an e-mail, so you can contact me via other routes as well. If you need anything, feel free to ask, Sadads (talk) 12:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I am reading your e-mail right now, and writing a suggestion. I can talk to you on gchat too, if you want to get on soon! Sadads (talk) 01:01, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, you would not only have to summarize the Childhood Obesity Task Force article but write it for DYK credit, Sadads (talk) 21:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, am i going to be able to do that do you think? Caleylynch4 (talk) 18:45, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not hard at all, and you would have to cover it in the main article anyway. You don't have to invest a whole lot of time in researching the task force (you just need 3-400 words, and I can help), Sadads (talk)

OK, thanks so much!! I am excited to get started- I am going to be looking for sources (3) by the 23rd of Feb. so should I look for sources for both Let's Move and The Task Force? Or just Let's Move to begin with? Caleylynch4 (talk) 01:01, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would create a list for the Task force in a WP:Sandbox, and if you want to pull aside sources for the main article to and put those on the article's talk page, that would be awesome as well. You should be able to find plenty of sources in Google News (pull everything you can aside), and several journal articles. You may want to explore other webpages too, but remember blogs and user created sites, such as Q&A websites are not WP:Reliable sources,Sadads (talk) 16:09, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I was away for the long weekend so I will be finding some sources today. I will email or let you know on here what I find and maybe you can look and see if they seem sufficient for the Wikipedia article. Caleylynch4 (talk) 13:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! Sadads (talk) 13:46, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at the sources, and it looks like a good start. You will definitely need some more secondary opinions to really flesh out the content fully, but it is a good start, Sadads (talk) 02:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How does my outline/summary look to you? Do you think I should add anything to it? Any important pieces of information I should make a section for? Caleylynch4 (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think your summary looks good, and I think we should charge ahead with writing the article. The sooner we can see how the sources are letting you write the content, the quicker we can make decisions on how the sections look. I find that a rough idea ahead of time, and a charge in with the actually writing works best, that way you don't set expectations of certain sections that you can't meet. It seems like you are covering all your bases though, so good job! Sadads (talk) 19:05, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK sounds good. I am going to be writing the content for it tomorrow afternoon so will have some stuff up later in the day tomorrow and then can get some feedback from you if that sounds ok? Caleylynch4 (talk) 20:58, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, Sadads (talk) 01:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, so I have written some of the article- talked with our campus ambassador about adding secondary news sources to back up primary sources, but other than that if you just want to take a look- thanks! Caleylynch4 (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, because you are focusing on the information that was communicated about the goals of the initiative, your not presenting a WP:Neutral point of view.. What you will find as you identify themes in the commentary from the secondary sources, you will see the analysis which other author offers averages out into a more thorough approach to the item itself. Good job, bye the way, its a good place to start, Sadads (talk) 20:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK so now I am confused because these are facts aren't they? Can it be disputed that these are the goals? Yes, they are from a standing Democratic president, but it's still fact- no? Wouldn't articles from secondary sources like from Google news represent more of a biased opinion? Caleylynch4 (talk) 17:55, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You want more depth then the basic facts though, you just need to balance the opinions about the topic in order to maintain a Nuetral Point of View. For example, when I wrote the article on Quicksilver_(novel), I found that some critics didn't like the book and some did. I made sure I noted both of these opinions and then I looked for common thematic threads amongst the commentary and showed how they created a more complex understanding of the topic in the Style and Themes sections. You can do the same with opinion pieces and news articles, even though they have a bias, it is not hard to compare how they express themselves about the topic and then create sections discussing common themes of their analysis.

Also, your Campus Ambassador asked me to help you nominate your article for WP:DYK, which we need to do in the next 5 days (see the other requirements at Wikipedia:DYK#Selection_criteria_. I may do a little bit of writing and research for the article myself to help make sure that it passes nomination. If you find any interesting or eye catching facts about the task force in your research (or some rather odd opinions) make note of them and we can use them for the hook. I suggest looking at the DYK section at the bottom lefthand side of the main page of Wikipedia to see what good hooks look like, Sadads (talk) 22:37, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination of Task Force on Childhood Obesity[edit]

Hello! Your submission of Task Force on Childhood Obesity at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Dravecky (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Task Force on Childhood Obesity[edit]

On 8 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Task Force on Childhood Obesity, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Task Force on Childhood Obesity, established by the Obama Administration in 2010, seeks to eliminate childhood obesity in the United States within a generation? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)