Personal tools
 
Views

User talk:Ali

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 03:06, 15 June 2009 (edit)
StudentCongress (Talk | contribs)
(Sorry, but got it back)
← Previous diff
Current revision (03:38, 18 June 2009) (edit)
Alibreland (Talk | contribs)
(Hey)
 
Line 83: Line 83:
I was brushing along your edits in [[Debate: Nuclear Test Ban Treaty]] and I accidently deleted your entire subquestion section, but good news! I got it completely back! Sorry for any inconvenience or panic! --[[User:StudentCongress|StudentCongress]] 22:05, 14 June 2009 (CDT) I was brushing along your edits in [[Debate: Nuclear Test Ban Treaty]] and I accidently deleted your entire subquestion section, but good news! I got it completely back! Sorry for any inconvenience or panic! --[[User:StudentCongress|StudentCongress]] 22:05, 14 June 2009 (CDT)
 +
 +== Hey ==
 +
 +Hi, I noticed we happened to have the same name, and that we both happened to be interns (i'm still in the trial period actually). I'm still trying to figure this intern thing out, and any advice you have about it would be good, plus it's nice to know someone around the site besides Brooks. -Ali

Current revision

Tasks



Some comments

  1. All subquestions should be phrased as questions, rather than statements.
  2. Debatepedia calls for sober language. Exclamation marks are not appropriate. -- Brooks Lindsay 23:43, 9 March 2008 (CDT)

Great work though Ali -- Brooks Lindsay 23:43, 9 March 2008 (CDT)


He Ali

We'll be making the multiculturalism vs. assimilation debate the "daily debate" for Monday. -- Brooks Lindsay 09:37, 7 March 2008 (CST)

Sounds good

And, yes, that's a fine approach. -- Brooks Lindsay 10:31, 5 March 2008 (CST)

I'll join you on Wednesday

For the multiculturalism vs. assim debate. We'll make it the daily debate for Thursday. I'm seeing good work from you Ali. Keep it up. - Brooks Lindsay 19:57, 4 March 2008 (CST)

Final edits today

Ali, we're going to have to do some final edits here. Follow my lead. What we're doing, is reading the articles, and inputing supporting evidence (quotes mostly) from those articles into argument pages we create. I'll work on the con side if you work on the pro side. -- Brooks Lindsay 15:39, 28 January 2008 (CST)

Next move

Ali, the next thing that you should be moving toward is quoting from the pro/con resources (at the bottom of the debate page), putting these quotes (supporting evidence) in argument pages. Why don't you do this for the pro side of the debate. I'll do the con side. Below is an example:

  • Conditions at Guantanamo are very good for detainees - Prisoner conditions at Guantanamo have actually improved substantially in President Bush's second term (04-08). This incremental change is largely due to the negative attention surrounding Guantanamo. It means that it may no longer be necessary to close down Guantanamo. In general, such opportunities for positive reform should be considered before closure. -- Brooks Lindsay 15:50, 25 January 2008 (CST)


Claims

Ali, you're doing a great job. One problem I'm seeing, however, is that you're not creating "claims" to start each argument. This is very important. A "claim" is a full, coherent sentence that summarizes an argument. A claim is: "It is impossible to statistically confirm that Guantanamo Bay has a deterrent effect on terrorists". "New judicial process condemned by human rights groups" is not a claim. "Legally it does not matter" is not a claim. For sure, it's completely ok that you're making some mistakes in this regard. See if you can go back through the arguments you've presented in the coming days and create clear "claims" to start each argument. Good work Ali. -- Brooks Lindsay 19:56, 24 January 2008 (CST)

Good progress on Guantanamo debate

I like what I'm seeing Ali. Quick tip: to moderate the size of an image, you can write the following "200px" or "100px" on the right side of the code as seen here - [[Image:January_Jan11GuantanamoBayArrivalProc.jpg|right|250px]] -- Brooks Lindsay 23:16, 20 January 2008 (CST)

YouTube videos

Here's how you do it: The url is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZFqjoVLjdQ, you take the tail of that aver v=, so "vZFqjoVLjdQ" and put it into the structure <youtube>vZFqjoVLjdQ</youtube>. Now you give it a try, so that you know how to do it. -- Brooks Lindsay 17:39, 20 January 2008 (CST)

Good work

Ali, I think that the background section is more neutral now. Feel free to look over it again and continue modifications. I like what I see with your arguments-section contributions. I've gone through and edited some of it. What I like seeing is that you are doing a good job of isolating specific argument "threads". Now, try to think of your first sentence in these isolated arguments (the "claim") as the incredibly concise summary of the argument paragraph you are presenting. I've tried to help with this. On images, I'm not sure what happened. You need to upload your image to Debatepedia ("upload file" in the tool box) and then cut-and-paste the image-page title into the debate page. Try this again and report back. Generally, great job Ali. Keep up the good work; the world will benefit from it. -- Brooks Lindsay 19:17, 19 January 2008 (CST)


Backgrounds need to be neutral

Ali, the background section you've created, while well written, does not fit with our guidelines for such sections. The background is to be neutral. What you've written is a case for closing Guantanamo. So, what we're going to have to do is transfer parts of your background section into the "con" side below. I will help you with this. -- Brooks Lindsay 18:07, 17 January 2008 (CST)

Images

Need a hand with the Guantanamo image? -- Brooks Lindsay 18:00, 17 January 2008 (CST)

Hey

Hey ali, you can use these discussion pages to communicate with other users of the site. You can "sign" your comments by writing ~~~~ at the end. -- Brooks Lindsay 10:42, 15 January 2008 (CST)

NAFTA

Hey

Good work on the NAFTA debate. For the end of the week and through next week, I want you to continue working on it. Read 5 pro and 5 con articles listed at the bottom of the debate page in the "pro/con resources" section and incorporate arguments and quotations from them. See the Debatepedia:Getting started tutorial to get a better sense on how to do this all. -- Brooks Lindsay 17:19, 26 June 2008 (CDT)


Here

This is your talk page. The user page is the tab in front of this. See assignment above. -- Brooks Lindsay 19:05, 28 June 2008 (CDT)

Great work

Your NAFTA debate edits are very good. I've made some changes, and posted additional editing tasks at the top of the pages. Keep on track with reading the five pro and five con articles and integrating arguments and quotations from them. Again, great work. Best, -- Brooks Lindsay 20:19, 29 June 2008 (CDT)

Sorry, but got it back

I was brushing along your edits in Debate: Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and I accidently deleted your entire subquestion section, but good news! I got it completely back! Sorry for any inconvenience or panic! --StudentCongress 22:05, 14 June 2009 (CDT)

Hey

Hi, I noticed we happened to have the same name, and that we both happened to be interns (i'm still in the trial period actually). I'm still trying to figure this intern thing out, and any advice you have about it would be good, plus it's nice to know someone around the site besides Brooks. -Ali

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.