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]> 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.blogs.com twitter.com/trine
