User talk:Prizmic

This user is a student editor in University_of_California,_Berkeley/Berkeley_Interdisciplinary_Research_Group_on_Privacy_-_Coleman_Lab_(Spring_2019) .

This user is a student editor in University_of_California,_Berkeley/Berkeley_Interdisciplinary_Research_Group_on_Privacy_-_Coleman_Lab_(Fall_2018) .

This user is a student editor in University_of_California,_Berkeley/Berkeley_Interdisciplinary_Research_Group_on_Privacy_-_Coleman_Lab_(Spring) .

Welcome!

Hello, Prizmic, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.

I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.

Handouts
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:41, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome and Hello Prizmic

Hi Prizmic, this is Class20 wishing you an awesome day! Get pumped for a year of Wikipedia fun. Just wanted to introduce myself and say hi. Unfortunately, I don't have much to "show off" for our discussion, but meanwhile hope I can brighten up your day with a collection of dogs. --Class20 (talk) 08:52, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Close paraphrasing

Hi, I received a notice that some of the content that you posted to the article Internet censorship in Singapore was plagiarized or closely paraphrased from source material. I reviewed the content and it's unfortunately still too closely paraphrased from the Barney Warf source. This is something that you've got to be very careful about with editing - it can be difficult when there aren't a lot of ways to re-word something, but still be cautious. The section that caused issues was specifically this one:

The Media Development Authority has monitored Internet activity and content since 1996, justified by its claim of monitoring a broadcasting service. ISPs are licensed by the Singapore Broadcasting Authority and are required to comply with the 1996 Internet Code of Practice. The Internet Code of Practice prohibits content that it deems "objectionable on the grounds of public interest, public morality, public order, public security, national harmony, or is otherwise prohibited by applicable Singapore laws."

This is all just too similar to the way it's presented in the journal article, which is as follows:

Its primary vehicle in this regard is the Singapore Media Development Authority (MDA), which has regulated Internet content under the guise of monitoring a broadcasting service since 1996. All ISPs are automatically licensed by the Singapore Broadcasting Authority, which routes all Internet con- nections through government proxy servers. Licensees are required to comply with the 1996 Internet Code of Practice, which includes a definition of “prohibited material,” i.e., content that it deems “objectionable on the grounds of public interest, public morality, public order, public security, national harmony, or is otherwise prohibited by applicable Singapore laws."

A good way to potentially resolve this would be to take notes from the source material and work from those notes, since that could make it easier to avoid close paraphrasing. Maybe something like this?

In 1996 the Singapore government's Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA) began monitoring Internet activity and content, which it classified as a broadcasting service. Under their guidelines all ISPs are considered to be licensed by the SBA and as such, were subject to the Internet Code of Practice that identified prohibited material. Prohibited material was any content seen as "objectionable on the grounds of public interest, public morality, public order, public security, national harmony, or is otherwise prohibited by applicable Singapore laws."

This isn't perfect, but it's a good start. You can work from that, if you like. I would like for you to review the module on plagiarism and copyright before progressing further, thanks. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:53, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Shalor, I will review the training again and change the content I added. -Prizmic (talk) 16:52, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's really easy to closely paraphrase without meaning to, so I can see where this happened - just be more careful in the future. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Patriot Act

I changed "undocumented person" back to "alien." See the talk page of the article for my reasons, i the section ""Undocumented" vs "alien"" Having a fist full of documents does not protect a non-US citizen from the Patriot Act. Edison (talk) 22:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, thanks. Prizmic (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand the concern, and if an article talked about "illegal aliens" then "undocumented persons" or undocumented workers" is a commonly used euphemism. (Like maybe they are in the country legally but forgot to carry their documents, or maybe they are really US citizens by birth and don't need such proof of legal residence). Regards. Edison (talk) 22:22, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating State privacy laws of the United States

Thanks for creating State privacy laws of the United States, which I have now reviewed and accepted.

The article is clearly a good foundation about a notable topic; thank you all very much for your work. If you would like to improve the article further, it may be useful to convert some tables to actual article sentences, or to add text to the pure tables.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:34, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]