Talk:Instagram

From SI410
Revision as of 18:47, 23 April 2017 by Chniri (Talk | contribs) (Past Class Comments)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Winter 2017 Notes

This is close to a Blue Star article but could use some citation formatting help. Bess

I will help improve the citation formatting. Chase

Past Class Comments

Just added a some information under ethics > professional photographers. Since English is not my first language, it would be good that someone checks that portion for any grammatical mistakes that I could have made. Thanks!! If you want to help me improve this article contact me: osgerman

^I just edited the professional photographers section for grammer and tried to make it concise --smrithid (talk) 7:41, 11 December 2012 (EST)


Would anyone else think it'd be a good idea to scrap some of the stuff that isn't as relevant in 2016? For example, I've never heard of InstaPad (especially since Instagram has an iPad app now) or Followgram. I would also argue that the "wealthy kids" section isn't relevant anymore. What do other people think? -- Madison Garver

2017: I agree with this, I think the page would be stronger, if these sections were deleted. Anyone else have thoughts? Chase Richmond


I think we can add a section about Instagram updates perhaps, that discusses the new features. Or puts a time stamp on third party sites that use Instagram data. It might be nice to have a separate section that organizes all of these sites as well. I personally have used a site similar to Followgram called Pikore, which I added to the section. Meera Desai


References 19-31 for the filter sub-section all refer to the same source.. which I don't think is the correct way to do that. I'm not entirely sure what the protocol is on re-using a source, but I think we should re-format according to the standards used on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Same_reference_used_more_than_once

I think we should either remove the repetitious references by leaving only reference 18 at the top of the filter section, or we could re-format all the repeat references according to the link I listed above. Seeing as the article does reference the specific filters that are tagged, I'm going to try to re-organize by leaving the references at the relevant individual filter names.

Just wanted to note this to see if anyone had differing opinions on how we should approach this. -- Joey Carron