User:Hanyangprofessor2/Instructions/2

The activity is composed of several steps.

1. Choose an article on English Wikipedia that has a request for citation (“citation needed” inline tag). Then add a properly formatted citation.


 * To find articles on topics related to Korea that need citations, see tinyurl.com/KOREACITE . For Korean ones, see tinyurl.com/CHINACITE

2. Make sure that your reference is correctly formatted (that it looks nice and contains useful information).


 * When adding a citation, use Visual Editor. Paste in the URL to a reliable source and generate footnote. You should include a short quote that proves the reference you add is relevant.
 * You should use a citation template (위키백과:인용 틀 on Korean Wikipedia) and make sure your reference has a title, author, publisher, date of publication (if available), and translated title (in addition to the original title, not instead of it) and quote supporting the claim being made (if the reference has a different language from the Wikipedia it is published on - for example if you add a Korean-language reference to English Wikipedia, please make sure English title and quote are included.
 * If the original work is in Chinese or Korean, and you are adding it as a reference to English Wikipedia, make sure to include both the original and English title, author names, publisher, etc. The title should be in original, with the English translation added in the "translated title" parameter. See the following example for how to add both English and Chinese author names: Manual_of_Style/China-_and_Chinese-related_articles (Korean names can be added in the same way)

3. Next, we have to ensure our references are reliable. You can check for this using the reliability script (note: this tool only works on English Wikipedia). To enable it, follow those steps:


 * go to your preferences/gadgets. Enable the tool "Install scripts without having to manually edit JavaScript files" and save the settings
 * Install the following wiki script: User:Headbomb/unreliable

Then review the source you have added. If it is red, it needs to be replaced. If it is yellow, it could be replaced too. Can you locate red or yellow references? Try to replace them with better ones.

4. How can we determine if a reference is good or bad? Collective intelligence does so through discussions.

5. Tell me why the references you have added are reliable. Are they academic?
 * Review discussions at Reliable sources/Noticeboard or zh:维基百科:可靠来源/布告板 (Korean subpage for this discussion does not exist as far I am aware). Can you add your own opinion to one of the ongoing discussions? Do not use AIs to generate discussion comments as this can result in a block of your account. Use your own judgement (you can use AI to improve the English grammar).
 * If you want to know why a particular reference has been declared low quality, first check the list at WP:RSP. If it is not listed there, check the archives at WP:RSN. For example, the following search of RSN archives explains why Chinese website Douban is not considered reliable. Or, check WP:BAIDU section at RSP for why Baidu is not reliable.
 * If you disagree with an assessment, you can always start a new discussion :)
 * You can also review guidelines on reliable sources for specialized topics. See examples: Korea, Video games, Medical topics. See others at Category:Wikipedia reliable source guides

6. Add a reference to an article using a scholarly source (academic paper or book). You can find scholarly sources via Google Scholar or Google Books

7. Think about references you have added to Wikipedia. Are they reliable?

Review the guideline at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources (shortcut: WP:RS) and tell me why your reference is reliable quoting relevant part of that policy.

You can also tell me why a reference you have removed was not reliable, again, quoting the relevant part of this policy.

8. Extra question: while government websites are often reliable, review the content of tinyurl.com/WIKISOVIETSTATS (Historiography_in_the_Soviet_Union) and consider when the government information cannot be trusted. Can you think of some other examples?

9. Extra question 2: review guidelines on reliable sources for specialized topics. Choose a topic you are interested in and that you think you are knowledgeable about. See examples: Korea, Video games, Medical topics. See others at Category:Wikipedia reliable source guides. What do you think about Wikipedia's collective intelligence analysis of sources in this topic area?

10. Today we will continue our activity on adding reliable sources.

Please add citations to Wikipedia using academic sources found on Google Scholar or Google Books or similar.

You should add at least one citation to an academic paper which has a DOI number and at least one citation to a book that has an ISBN.

Your book reference should have a page number. Extra point if you can link to the specific page visible in Google Books. Example: https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=mbjADwAAQBAJ&pg=PA53

11. Identify fake news using websites listed at1 List of fact-checking websites. Check what the Wikipedia says about this incident (fake news incident). Is there fake news on Wikipedia? Should something be removed? If information about fake news is missing, add information to Wikipedia that a given topic was subject to fake news, citing one of those websites.

12. Do you know any fact-checking websites not listed in the Wikipedia list above? Try adding them to the list - or comment about them on the list's discussion page.

13. If you find information about websites spreading fake news, you can add them to List of fake news websites or start a discussion on the talk page proposing that it is added.

14. Fake news and other errors can make it to Wikipedia. Review the List of hoaxes on Wikipedia or Zhemao hoaxes. You can blog about how collective intelligence fights errors for extra credit or tell me your opinion in class.

15. Sometimes links to sources are broken. This is known as link rot. Such links should not be removed but should be fixed. See Citing_sources. Can you fix a broken link somewhere? Take a look at Category:Articles with dead external links