User:Emilyfontana/sandbox

Content Gap
Wikipedian's often talk about "content gaps." What do you think a content gap is, and what are some possible ways to identify them? I think a content gap is when an article lacks content that is essential to the topic. Some possible ways to identify them is to start by identifying the goals you need to achieve, understand your target audience, and to map out the journey.

What are some reasons a content gap might arise? What are some ways to remedy them? A content gap might arise when keywords are needed in the right context, when there is possible competition, and to provide the right to act on something. A way to remedy them could be to develop models to support education and preparation.

Does it matter who writes Wikipedia? It does not matter who writes on Wikipedia as long as the individual follows Wikipedia guidelines by citing all sources, avoiding copyrighted material, and not harming the site or users.

What does it mean to be "unbiased" on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of "bias"? To be "unbiased" on Wikipedia means to not share personal opinions or findings but to publish scholarly truthful research and facts. This is very similar to my own definition of "bias" as I see a bias as someone or something who believes in one thing and does not possess the space to understand other opinions or facts.

Thinking About Wikipedia

 * What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"?
 * the definition of "neutrality" makes an editor hyper aware of what needs to be done and how.
 * What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information?
 * impacts include collaborated work effort, ability to improve others works
 * limits include keeping opinions to yourself, being neutral, not having reputable information
 * On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?
 * sources that speak on primary sources, studies, and research already conducted
 * problems that these types of sources might create is that the author could reword the primary source and end up making it inaccurate
 * If Wikipedia were written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?
 * the content would be based on primary sources and the contributors would most likely be the individuals who create the primary sources. 100 years from now I can see wikipedia incorporating more videos as sources.