Talk:Text annotation

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Books: Reference works This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles This article is supported by the Reference works task force. Typography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography 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.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Text annotation was nominated as a Language and literature good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 28, 2012). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2021 and 11 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mabryan4.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded the lead to give a more detailed definition of a text annotation and also added a "See also" to connect to other pages related to this topic. This article is a fair start but would benefit from more content, including an expansion of the history section, more information on current uses and text annotation technologies, applications and uses of the different types of annotations (paper, handwritten, web, etc.), and more references to scholarship in this area. My partner and I are working will be adding some of this content over the next couple weeks; feedback, thoughts, comments, pointers, etc. welcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ana Cooke (talk • contribs) 17:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The section on Social reading needs references. First paragraph seems like an essay. Robertekraut (talk) 13:08, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Text annotation/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grandiose (talk · contribs) 10:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC) I'll be taking this review.[reply]

• Tone of "Social reading" is unencyclopedic; needs referencing; direct link should be avoided.
• In terms of layout, "Educational applications" is a-paragraph-a-source which isn't helpful to the reader understanding the points being made. Ideally the passages should be woven so as to have each paragraph making a separate point. There's also an external link which should be avoided and actually it ought to be the general system we're interested in, not that particular one.
• I think there's a surprising amount missing from the history. The image of the Talmud is a great example, but the history section is short. There is no mention of glosses, for example and those subjects dealt with are very brief. This ought to be expanded.
• The passage including: (1)"facilitat[ing] reading and later writing tasks," which includes annotations that support reading for both personal and professional purposes; (2)"eavesdrop[ping] on the insights of other readers," which involves sharing of annotations; (3)"provid[ing] feedback to writers or promote communication with collaborators," is very difficult to follow. Consider presenting it in another format.

Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 10:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's a lot of work to be done here; I'lve put the article on hold for seven days. If at that stage these task aren't complete, I'll fail it: this is essentially an indefinite hold. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:27, 18 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm failing the article but if the nominator returns I'll open up a new review as soon as I'm notified of his or her return. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 15:03, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]