As we are nearing the end of the semester and the final phase of our project, I think we have made great strides in improving the functionality and appearance of the wiki. I feel that it certainly looks better than when it was turned over to us at the beginning of the semester, and the navigation through the articles, periodicals, and historical contexts will only improve as we approach the end of the semester.
Even though we’ve received timelines for the other groups, I think we should’ve perhaps started a Blackboard discussion where we could check in with what the other groups were doing or needing at any point during the project. I think this would allow us to improve communication between the different teams, and ensure that we’re working toward a more cohesive set of goals. There has been some communication between groups through email, but I think having a set thread on Blackboard where we could query each group during any point may have helped the inter-group communication and efficiency.
I think that the wiki still needs quite a bit of work, although, once things get going, I’m sure it will shape up quickly. The welcome page is much better. I like the tone of the introductory paragraph. The tone is much more laid back and it sounds like something a college student would write. With our purpose being to educate peer students, making the welcome page fun and, imagine, welcoming is great. The change of the pictures is refreshing. The pictures would benefit from titles explaining what they are. Their purpose is not unclear but further clarification would be helpful for less informed readers.
I would like a solution to be found for the timeline conundrum, as I am on the Historical Context team. It is quite aggravating for the historical page to be bare of historical aspects. In the meantime, we should post a makeshift table just so there is something to look at.
So far the things that have been added seem to be better than what was on there at the beginning. The wiki still requires a lot of work but hopefully, this will be an improvement on what was here at the beginning of our semester. The timeline my group has been working on should prove to be quite a lot better than the one that was one here before. I like what has been done to our introduction page. I think it better explains what we are trying to do on our works. The problem is that we decided to change quite a bit and I wonder if we bit off more than we can chew. That is always the problem with trying to update somebody else’s work, because the editor doesn’t quite know what they are getting into. However, with what we have planned it seems to that this is not some Herculean feat.
We obviously have quite a few things to add to the wiki at this point. I think the things that we are planning to add will give more value to the page and turn out nicely. I’m looking forward to the timeline and seeing how that shapes up. But overall, I think the wiki is nice and the front page has improved. I think the new pictures are fitting for the goal of the site and look good. As far as the individual contributions go, I know I’m not the only one a little overwhelmed by the coding process so I think it will help for us all to work on some of that together in class perhaps to work out confusion and frustrations with that. As soon as we get the timeline, breakout paragraphs, individual contributions, and Texts page sorted out I think our site will be looking great!
Our wiki still needs a lot of work. I know I need to add my introduction, works cited, footnotes, etc. to my page. I also need to change the link to my text in order for it to look the same. I like our intro page but I wonder if we could make those pictures a little larger? It’s kind of hard to fully appreciate them at the size they are currently. Also do we want to take that familiar of a tone? I like it personally, but I’m not sure it quite matches the work we are doing. As for the timeline, I’m excited to see how that works out! Hopefully we can get that up and running soon. I think it will make a big difference. We also need the breakout paragraphs squared away, which shouldn’t be too hard once we get the hang of the code. Overall, it still needs a lot of work but once we put our minds to it I don’t think it will be such a challenge. I’m really excited to see the end result!
Working on the Wiki was a new experience for me. I still do not quite understand coding but things are coming along slowly. Its kind of confusing and hard to grasp. Doing coding in class together would have been really helpful. It is nice to be able to see other people’s pages to get a reference. I think that the set up of the wiki is clean and easy to maneuver. If I was using this page as an outsider it would be a good reference. The resources each person used is available to the readers easily and I really like the further reading section. The new pictures that were chosen to be on the front page make it look more lively and interesting. I think the possibility of a new time line will add to the clean appearance and add more background information. This way users could easily see a wide variety of information about the nineteenth century, not just what applies to certain stories. The amount of background information we included will be really helpful for people who use our page. There is also a wide variety of periodicals that we used and found our stories in. As well as stories from different subject fields. Allowing each student to find their own story and do what they think is interesting created an unique perspective of the nineteenth century.
As of yet, I am satisfied with the progress that we are having in regards to the function of the wiki. (Also, side note, the main page looks better and less austere than it did before with some updated photos that are relevant to the subject area). However, I would also like to express some frustration with the lack of communication happening between the different groups. At this point in time, I have had to work under the assumption that the other groups are covered, and my main function is to coordinate the finalization and perfection of the individual contributions from a copy editor standpoint. I would like to commend my classmates for their cognizance of the due dates and their attention to whom they must be sending their work for review, for through them I have learned even more the value of timeliness, as balancing the editing of these works with working on my own contribution has proven to be both challenging and helpful. I want to be as helpful as possible in my suggestions to my classmates, but I still find myself a bit out of my depth in the coding sphere. The cheat sheet given to us by Professor Chang is proving invaluable in this endeavor, and I am slowly learning my way around the actual aesthetic elements of the wiki.
The function of the wiki is to inform the readers on information that is associated with the subject that is the focus for the wiki site, which is this case is Victorian Short Fiction. This is split up into the short fiction text, Authors, periodicals, and the Historical Context for our page. I think that the list of further readings we have for our individual contributions can also be put on the page about our authors along with a link back to the short story we each chose from that author. I do not think that footnotes or notes are necessarily important to have as part of the pages about the text that have been selected by those of us in this class, because if people wanted to understand something that is confusing to them in the introductions for these text they can look at the work cited section and look up the information for themselves. However, footnotes or notes save the reader from having to do this. These are just a few ideas that can be derived from reflecting on the wiki as a whole.
I do have one concern; I feel that communication between the groups could have been more optimal. The other copy editors and I made sure that there was clear communication from the group to the other students—our expectations and requirements were clear, and they will receive feedback shortly. We did receive a list of dates laying out the goals of each group, but I did not feel that other groups let the other students including myself know of what they required of us, if anything. I felt that they could also double check with the other students, if they were making any changes, and run it by with us to make sure we liked the changes. I hope that I hear from them soon and make sure I do my part outside of my own copy editor group as well as knowing what changes are happening to the Wiki page. As of right now, I am happy with it. It obviously is far from finished, but I think the general set up and aesthetics are good if the historical page and the front page are improved by the different groups, with things like more interesting pictures; additionally, little by little, more classes will add to the site and make the wiki more useful and comprehensive.
I have a few comments on the experience of creating our contributions as well. I was glad that during this capstone experience several parts were due in increments, which helped us as students to plan out our research and writing while juggling work and other projects for classes. Having to prepare a presentation and hearing feedback helped me to get started and expand my scope of research, and because each fragmented section was due at different times and there were guided expectations for revisions, my work was continually expanded and improved piece by piece. By the end, I feel extremely proud of my contribution, and I am confident that my information will be pertinent, readable, dependable, and interesting. I learned a lot about the culture, history, and literature of the era through my research and preparation, and I’m happy about the product of my hours of hard work. The experience was useful, and I feel as though I’ve contributed in some small way to the critical literature and analysis of the Victorian Era.
I found the peer editing process to be very beneficial in multiple ways. First and foremost, my own work that is peer edited stands to be improved. Many times, I know what I mean to say in a paper but that does not always come across clearly in the paper itself. Getting feedback from my peers is also helpful. Not only do they inform me what is not clear but they also give suggestions for further analysis of themes that I had thought originally thought of and suggestions for simpler wording. Editing others’ works is helpful to editing my own as well. By reading others’ work, I can see ways to improve my work by seeing devices that work and do not work in the paper, such as having a lengthy introduction versus a short one or having a synopsis of the story in question or not. At this level of education, I find that it is almost necessary to have peer editing available so that a paper can get the most feedback possible to make it as impactful as it can possibly be.