yes i wasn't being clear, i actually meant my article might not be useful as a source for citing definitions of videoblogs, as it's about colonisation of new media spaces by politicians. :)
I'll write that one next ;-) On 5/4/07, Richard (Show) Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Ok, for the record, if the article you refer to is in a peer-reviewed > jornal, it's gone through at least as much serious scrutiny as anything > published in a book or via a traditional news media source > > In fact, in a serious journal, if I try using a magazine/news article as a > reference, it would not be acceptable. > > ... Richard > > p.s. I'm not saying I agree with the whole definition of "reliable" article > in wikipedia, or that the academic peer-review process is the best as far > as > truth goes, but, I will say academics have been having this debate for a > long time and, as a result - via the peer review process - they have, by > far, the most brutal (tedious, time consuming) process of verification and > cross verification of any sort if informational outlet, but, lord help us > if > we're stuck with that :) > > On 5/3/07, trine bjørkmann berry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > i dont know if it's helpful, but I've added my short article on david > > cameron's videoblog to the wikipedia article. (under all the book > > entries) - i realise it's not on par with the books in terms of > > citeability, but it's academic and published in a journal. > > > > cheers > > Trine > > > > > > On 5/3/07, Jay dedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <jay.dedman%40gmail.com>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Okay....if you care about the wikipedia article on Videoblogging, lets > > > take all the conversation to that site. Ive jumped in here: > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Video_blog#Removed_section:_Dispute_over_terminology > > > > > > "Pdelongchamp, since you seem to have a vision for this page, maybe > > > you can share with us where you want this go. Or are you just being a > > > referee as people make contributions? It'll help me understand exactly > > > what role you are playing in this process. I am assuming good faith, > > > but it's unclear to me where you're mind is at. What is Videoblogging > > > to you? With all the articles and books listed so far, it's difficult > > > to say that it's not a significant artform. I think it would help if > > > we could all agree on the major areas we want to cover. > > > > > > Let's document the discussion/writing over there so its official. > > > To be honest, I read wikipedia all the time, but have never > > > contributed to an article. So it'll be new to me. > > > > > > Patrick, I'm going to take you at your word that you're working in good > > > faith. > > > let's start building. > > > there are so many mainstream articles, books, and scholarly reports to > > > pull from. > > > > > > Jay > > > > > > -- > > > Here I am.... > > > http://jaydedman.com > > > > > > Check out the latest project: > > > http://pixelodeonfest.com/ > > > Webvideo festival this June!!!! > > > > > > > -- > > -------------------------------- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <trine.berry%40gmail.com> > > trine.blogs.com > > twitter.com/trine > > > > > > > > -- > Richard > http://richardhhall.org > Shows > http://richardshow.org > http://inspiredhealing.tv > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > -- -------------------------------- [EMAIL PROTECTED] trine.blogs.com twitter.com/trine
