Talk:Edublog

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Internet culture Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Education Low‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Revised lead paragraph[edit]

Minor stylistic changes for clarity, and references to fringe jargonised terms like "edublogosphere" removed on the grounds that they are not in mainstream use.Colinjl (talk) 18:12, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Masters Group 2012 Saunders[edit]

July 18, 2012 as a group of educators we felt that the entry on student blogging was in need of updating. We have changed the subheading 'Student Blogging'to ‘Blogging in the K to 12 Classroom' to narrow the focus of the contribution. We provided citations to verify the information on the K to 12 student blogger and through our editing; we removed an existing section that became redundant.

Masters Group 2012 Decker[edit]

July 19, 2012. Deleted the lead box where it was stated that more references were required. We deleted this box because we have added over 30 new references so this is longer required.Sdecker81 (talk) 13:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 19, 2012. Proof read the section to ensure that it meets with wikipedia guidelines, fixing spacing of references and punctuation. Checking for errors in writing to ensure that the material is presented in a factual manner.Sdecker81 (talk) 12:40, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 18, 2012 Added and edited the teacher blog section. Adding references to the text as this section had no citations. We added a section for links to popular teacher blogs and we added a sub-section under Teacher blogs regarding Controversies with teachers blogging. Citing two teachers who have been suspended or fired due to their blogging. Also edited multi-user edublogging platforms. We checked to ensure they are still current. Sdecker81 (talk) 15:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 17, 2012 Our group is researching and adding to the Edublog entry. So far, we have taken the information provided and created headings to help organize the information. We split the information given into headings blogs in education, Teacher blogs, Student Blogs and Use of Blogs. We are also adding citations to the site to help verify the information given as suggested by Wikipedia. Sdecker81 (talk) 16:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 17, 2012 PM. Our group is continuing to reformat the page. Adding external links to educational bloggers. We deleted Wayback machine link because it no longer worked, it sent us to a dead page. We also added to the History section. Which we will then add a internal link from the blog wikipage to the edublog page. Sdecker81 (talk) 16:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added references to the teacher section.Sdecker81 (talk) 17:17, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Previous Talk[edit]

Is it appropriate for me to edit this article, as I am a member of this "community?" I ask because it seems like a grey area in Wikipedia policy -- can a North Carolinian write about North Carolina? It seems to me that this is a similar situation, so I will continue to make edits here until told otherwise. --Budtheteacher 22:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess so Bud. If not you then who? Jo McLeay 11:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Edubloggers[edit]

OK, as this may cause some debate, I believe that Will Richardson definitely belongs on the list of notable edubloggers as he has published several books and is cited in the news media daily. If you wish to delete a person, you should follow effective wiki practice and wikipedia's own guidelines by posting information on the talk page. Victoria A. Davis 18:07, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No one is going to argue about Will's inclusion. He was on the original list... but we stopped creating new bios for people until someone else came along and joined in. Thanks for your effort --Davecormier 01:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just poked around a bit in the history file. A few people were trying to add themselves... and some person named icecream something deleted all the entries that did not have actual wikipedia entries. If you look carefully someone actually added their own name with their own wikipedia id... very bad form! --Davecormier 01:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree that a person should never add themselves but should allow the group to do it. However, many of us are beginners at this Wikipedia thing so they may not know that. This whole exchange shows me how edubloggers have not attended to a vital source of information in education (that we ourselves are advocating) by contributing and correcting. Victoria A. Davis 14:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In August, Vicki Davis was removed from the list of notable edubloggers after having been added about six months prior. Should she be on this list, as I think, or are there a set of criteria that can be articulated to exclude her? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rossisen (talk • contribs) 20:18, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just added information about ways to use blogs in education. Klc1123 (talk) 17:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EduSpaces and ELGG[edit]

As far as I'm aware, EduSpaces is based on the ELGG platform. Elgg.net was changed to EduSpaces to avoid confusion. Should there be a link to elgg.org as well as EduSpaces? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dave1010 (talk • contribs) 10:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Controversies subsection off-topic[edit]

The subsection about Controversies about Teacher Blogs seems to be off-topic. Personal blogs, especially anonymous ones, written for the purpose of a teacher venting about their frustrations are not written for educational purposes and therefore are not "edublogs". They are just personal blogs that happen to be written by teaching staff. This section does not indicate that actual dedicated edublogs, as opposed to purely personal ones, have been used for the purpose of criticising students or school policy, so there is no clear connection with the topic of the article. --Smcg8374 (talk) 03:02, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that there should be a public controversy section which includes this story: https://www.pcmag.com/archive/145m-education-blogs-pulled-offline-after-dmca-takedown-notice-303940 which reports on the taking down of 1.5M edublogsYatchc (talk) 23:11, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]