Talk:Android Developer Day

Plans for revision: 1.) Write a better description of what the event is about. 2.) List the speakers of the event 3.) Discuss the topics covered at the event 4.) Give a brief history of the event 5.) Define the purpose of the event 6.) What is the schedule at the event (2014) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gvanalst (talk • contribs) 01:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Links we plan to use: http://www.androiddeveloperdays.com/ http://www.wikicfp.com/cfp/servlet/event.showcfp?eventid=36084&copyownerid=61337 http://www.eteration.com/android-developer-days-is-reloaded-for-2013/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvandage (talk • contribs) 02:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC) http://www.androiddeveloperdays.com/schedule/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gvanalst (talk • contribs) 02:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC) https://www.facebook.com/androiddeveloperdays — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gvanalst (talk • contribs) 02:11, 25 February 2014 (UTC) http://conference.researchbib.com/?action=viewEventDetails&eventid=33246&uid=raf091 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvandage (talk • contribs) 02:12, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Review of Android Developer Day

The first issue that catches my attention is the name of the Wikipedia article; the name of the article is Android Developer Day but the event is Android Developers Days. This is just a minor change that can clarify to viewers if this event is multiple days or just a one day event. With regards to Wikipedia's policy on a neutral point of view, the editor uses the term yours but should change this to third-person using the terms his or her instead of yours.I like how the editors separated each Convention and gave details about that specific event. In addition, the added hyperlinks and sources added to the article came from credible sources. The last issue I want to address is about the participants category. I believe viewers can become confused because the list provided is for only the featured speakers at the 2014 ADD convention. Unless Wikipedia editors are going to update this category yearly, editors should take caution in providing information that needs to be constantly updated. Instead of listing featured speakers, a possible solution could be to name and give details about important founders of ADD. This would contribute to the History of ADD and eliminate the issue of having to update the article quarterly or yearly. Ethanforman (talk) 18:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

So to start off, pretty well done article! The coverage of the conferences was comprehensive and specific,and I really understand what they are by the end of reading it. There are some small concerns, though. There is ambiguity about what the article is-- android developer "day" or "days". This should probably be clarified. Moreover, refrain from using wording like "this year" which really loses value when the article spans for more than one year. Also, making 2014 convention it's own section breaks the consistency of the article. even if teh convention warrants a greater significance, it should still be with the other sections otherwise it confuses the reader. Also, makign the 2014 section larger than the 2012 and 2013 section leads the reader to think that this conference is considerably more important than the other sections which either isn't true or is not really made clear in the description. [[User:Ronaldbasin|Ronaldbasin] (talk) 1:17, 24 March 2014 (UTC) Mark Kurzeja (Kurjagger) Class Summary

The Android Developer Day article was both concise and easy to read. The information presented was laid out well and proper use of headings and sub headings made the article easy to "jump read" and get the important information quickly. Things that you did particularly well:

• Concise wording
• Use of many external sources
• Large amounts of internal linking
• Well documented

As well, there were a number of things that I noticed that could be improved:

• Listing of "this year" or "soon" makes maintenance of the page difficult as time, itself, progresses
• Defining Synergy and its role seems out of place
• "As mentioned above" reference break with edits over time
• Listing of various topics for 2014 conference is too verbose
• Three-deep headings not needed with 2.2.1 Sub Events

Overall, The article was well put together and worked well with the topic. Your list of references was inclusive and well cited and the links provided on the page made for easy navigation if the user wanted more information. Good job all. Kurjagger (talk) 14:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Excellent work on this article. I felt that overall the structure was very well thought-out and easy to follow. I think the most important parts of the article were the summaries of past conventions. These gave me a significantly better idea of what android developer days are. This may also be an area of concern as the introduction still left me wondering what exactly the event included. The only serious problem I can see is as mentioned above the issue with using "this year" and "soon" as these words will eventually lose thier credibility and accuracy. ~~User: Nickmich1695|Nick Michetti~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nickmich1695 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I thought this article was very easy to read and was very informative. Things done well:

• It was to the point and covered a lot about the history of the convention
• It was really defined what happened in each convention so far, which is very helpful to the reader
• It was nice to know the speakers that have talked in the convention
• You really defined what the ADD really was

There should a few changes.

• You should change the title to Android Developer Days instead of Day because it is slightly misleading.
• How do they decide which country and city holds the event each year? How do they come up with the topics that they discuss at these events?
• The structure could be changed around a little.

Overall, the article was solid and I think it is a job well done!Sharonkang08 (talk) 19:10, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

This article was obviously thoroughly researched and explicated. The introduction was very clear and concise, and I instantly grasped purpose and goals of ADD. I think it was a very good idea to break down the history of the convention by year, making it much more navigable. I was impressed by how much information they were able to find on specific discussions held at each conference. However, I found long lists of number specifics almost distracting and would have rather seen more about what was accomplished at these conferences. In the last section, I appreciate the extensive list of other topics addressed, but, as some one who is non-literate in the tech community, these lists were not too meaningful to me. It would have been helpful to hyperlink to other pages or briefly summarize them. I also noticed that some of the other participants have wikipedia articles written about them, and it would have been nice to be able to click instantly to find out more about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djmadchill (talk • contribs) 21:14, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Overall, the article was well written and had a good flow of ideas. While in the opening paragraph it was easy for the reader to understand what Android Development Day (ADD) is, the subsequent historical background was also written effectively. It was easy to understand where ADD started, and how the most recent (2014) conference came about. Given our assignment's prompt, your edits did an excellent job in finding thorough information relating to each sub-topic, with some (not all) well chosen sources. The sources were also cited properly. Another aspect that was done quite well was the "Participants" section, whereby the reader was able to understand the importance of ADD by seeing who attends the conference.

There are a few aspects that could use some improvement:

• There was a discrepancy between "Android Development Day" and "Android Development Days", alongside some other (minor) grammatical mistakes
• Your "box" could be improved to include things like participant number, conference budget, participant growth rate, past locations, etc (overall general, but useful, information)
• A subsection further discussing what sorts of activities occur within the actual conference, the selection process, etc
• Any famous/large ideas coming out of each ADD conference could be analyzed in greater depth

Acanelas (talk) 17:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Review of Android Developer Day (By: Waleed Khan)

I thought that this article was written in both in an informative manner as it clearly described the main objective of the "Android Developer Day" and the objective behind its creation. The graphics on the page really caught my attention and made me want to read the article and learn more about the topic that was being presented. I also liked the fact that the writer made sure to include information about how one can attend this event as that may be very important to readers who enjoy this topic of android development. The writer not only used a wide variety of sources but also made sure they were credible, which ensured the page was based on reliable information. I also enjoyed reading about both past events of Android Developer Day as it gave me a good understanding of what actually occurs at these conferences. Furthermore, by providing information about future events, the writer also made sure to inform interested readers about what activities might be occurring in the future.