User:Lastdaysofdisco/sandbox

Wikipedia MLA Citations
Frida Kahlo

"Frida Kahlo." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 14 Sep. 2014. Web. 16 Sep. 2014.

Jorge Luis Borges

"Jorge Luis Borges." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 26 Sep. 2014. Web. 28 Sep. 2014.

Canadian Indian residential school system

"Canadian Indian residential school system." ''Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia'', The Free Encyclopedia, 13 Sep. 2014. Web. 16 Sep. 2014.

Audism

"Audism." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 23 Aug. 2014. Web. 28 Sep. 2014.

Other Encyclopedia MLA Citations
Frida Kahlo

"Frida Kahlo." Encyclopedia of World Biography. 2004. Encyclopedia.com. 28 Sep. 2014.

Jorge Luis Borges

“Jorge Luis Borges.” Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 28 Sep. 2014.

Residential Schools

Miller, J.R.. "Residential Schools." The Canadian Encyclopedia. Toronto: Historica Canada, Oct. 2012. Web. 28 Sep. 2014.

Audism

“Audism.” Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopaedia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 28 Sep. 2014.

Reflections
The research process was not as simple and straightforward as I had initially anticipated. I was really quick to pick intial topics that I was really interested in exploring more, but realized that some of them had to be revised or fully omitted throughout the process due to the volume of available information (or lack thereof). I also had to read through the articles to see how they were structured, whether there was any obvious bias, and if they were flagged for any inaccuracies (on Wikipedia). I had many ideas for topics to research but settled on ones that appealed to me in either artistic/creative (the fascinating life and art of Frida Kahlo and the bizarre post-modern literature of Borges - who was also a librarian and has a lot of library themes in his short stories!) or politically charged ways (the shame of Canada's Residential School system, and the discrimination against the Deaf/deaf community).

Wikipedia Discussion
Wikipedia was by far the most simple and accessible source for information on just about any topic, no matter how obscure. I was easily able to find extensive information on all the topics I explored, even ones I didn't ultimately end up choosing. I love how easy Wikipedia is to navigate and the fact that you can get lost in a maze of related information because there are a plethora of links throughout each article. It is a great platform in which to begin exploring and brainstorming research topics.

This being said, it is generally not a valid citation source when it comes to academic research papers. The source is not seen as credible because of how open the process is. Although it is a really awesome concept to have "living documents" that are constantly being updated from individuals with a wide range of perspectives and resources, this is also its downfall when it comes to credibility. Although Wikipedia does have some systems in place to try to combat faulty facts and biases, such as keeping revision histories visible and allowing users to leave notes justifying their edits (in the "Talk" section), many contributions come from either anonymous or non-professional/non-academic sources.

Other References Discussion
I found it more tricky to find the same volume of information from other encyclopedia sources (I explored all the resources listed for the assignment). I originally expected them to have the same fleshed out information as Wikipedia, so I found myself omitting topics that only contained the bare bones of a subject. Although a source such as the Encyclopaedia Britannica is far more academically credible than Wikipedia, some of the entries were far too narrow or limited to do anything with. For example, the entry on Frida Kahlo was so brief and focused more on her marriage to Diego Rivera and her connections to other artists, rather than on her own unique life and work. For this reason, I searched elsewhere and found more biographical information in The Encyclopedia of World Biography.

Another example is that I originally wanted to pick articles on Deaf Culture or American Sign Language, because I have previously worked within a Deaf community and I found it fascinating and rich. There was a lot of current, culturally respectful information on Wikipedia, but it was difficult to find this same information in other encyclopedias. Britannia did not have anything specifically on the culture itself and the articles on sign language equated it solely to the "inability to speak", or focused on deafness as a physical disorder. I had to search around a bit more (using different search terms) and surprisingly found a short entry about Audism, which is a form of discrimination against deaf/Deaf people.

I also selected the other encyclopedias based on the context of the subject itself. For example, I chose to use The Canadian Encyclopedia for information about the Aboriginal residential school system specific to Canada. I wanted to use a source with a lot of information, especially something that focused on the systemic abuse and racism. One suspicious aspect of The Canadian Encyclopedia is that it didn't appear to have any proper citations for the information provided (unless it was all from the "Suggested Readings" section?) Britannica also had lots of good information, but it was only a subsection within the longer, U.S.-centric piece Native Americans Overall, it was a slower process to select similar articles outside of Wikipedia, but it was good practice in learning to evaluate sources.

Article Summaries
Wikipedia

Jorge Luis Borges (24 August 1899 – 14 June 1986) was an Argentine writer, critic, translator, and librarian who contributed greatly to Spanish literature. The Wikipedia article provides extensive and detailed information about Borges’ life, story-telling, and political and cultural influences. Some of his most known works are Ficciones and The Aleph. Some classify his texts as falling into the literary category of magical realism, though other critics believe that his work actually precedes this classification. He does include a lot of fantastical and symbolic elements in his stories and uses such themes as dreams, libraries, labyrinths, mirrors, and religion.

He was head director of the National Library in Argentina and a professor of English literature at the University of Buenos Aires in 1955. When he was 55 years of age, he became fully blind, but never learned braille, therefore losing the ability to read. Instead, he heavily relied on his aging mother and personal secretaries to transcribe his work, until his death at the age of 87.

Britannica Online Academic Edition

The total length of the Britannica entry is a few short paragraphs. The article begins with a brief history of Borges’ family and his father’s intellectual influence on him. The Wikipedia entry takes this information further by mentioning that his father had a large personal library and that Borges later stated "if I were asked to name the chief event in my life, I should say my father's library." The total length of the Britannica entry is a few short paragraphs. The article begins with a brief history of Borges’ family and his father’s intellectual influence on him. The Wikipedia entry takes this information further by mentioning that his father had a large personal library and that Borges later stated "if I were asked to name the chief event in my life, I should say my father's library." .

Britannica also briefly notes Borges’ political leanings and his participation in the Ultraist Movement the Ultraist Movement. Borges’ health issues are discussed, including his severe head injury and blood poisoning in 1938 and his total blindness by 1955 (which was a condition that also afflicted his father). The rest of the article includes a very brief overview of his works and his winning of the Formentor Prize, which gained him international recognition. Wikipedia also touches on this fact, as well as his other literary prizes under its “International Renown” sub section.

Comparison of Articles
In the Britannica article, information is far shorter, more concise and generalized, compared to Wikipedia. There are no categories or subsections, except for one quote at the end, along with the reference list and further resources. Britannica also includes links to other internal entries that mention Borges’ work.

Both articles discuss Borges literary contributions and his professions as librarian, lecturer, and translator. The articles also address Borges’ health issues and his subsequent dependency on his mother for guidance and dictation of his work. Regarding Borges’ head injury, Britannica notes that “this experience appears to have freed in him the deepest forces of creation”. Although it is an interesting comment, it is not a fact, which doesn’t stay true to an encyclopedia’s purpose of objectivity.

Unlike the Wikipedia article, Britannica does not discuss his short stories and poems in depth. Wikipedia goes into detail about his various stories and common themes and influences that run throughout them.

Both articles do touch on his political opinions and controversies, namely his anti-Peronism. Something that the Britannica article doesn’t touch upon is Borges’ personal life with regards to his romantic relationships. Since the Wikipedia article contains a vast amount of details about his life, they do include this near the end. Marriage does not appear to have been a priority for Borges. In the subsection “Later Personal Life” Wikipedia notes that In 1967, Borges married Elsa Astete Millán upon urging from his aging mother. They divorces three years later and Borges moved back in with his mother until she died. In 1986, he married his personal assistant and traveling partner, Maria Kodama. A few months later, he died.

Discussion of References & Contributors
Wikipedia

The Wikipedia article has just over one hundred outside references, which is very extensive and well-researched. The references are varied and contain primary sources (such as Borges’ books & stories) as well as secondary sources (such as biographies, literary criticisms and studies, essays on cultural and philosophical theory) which appear to be highly academic. Quite a few sources are in Spanish without translation, which is true to Borges’ cultural background, but inaccessible to English speakers. At the end of the article, there are over fifty suggestions for further reading, including a few documentaries. This would be very useful for individuals who further wish to investigate Borges’ life. As far as contributors go, there are a large amount of them who have edited the article over the years. When I reviewed the "History" section, a couple that stood out (because their names were mentioned so many times) were Cocolacoste and Jmabel. The former is a Mater’s student at the University of Buenos Aires and is an approved Spanish to English translator and proofreader. . The latter has contributed a lot to the Borges article as well as articles about some of Borges’ individual stories. Has done a lot of Spanish to English translation work and has been awarded Master Editor on Wikipedia. The credibility of these two contributors can assure us that the information provided in the article is well researched, translated, and edited.

Encyclopaedia Britannica

There does not appear to be any references for the Britannica article. There are no footnotes/endnotes or a reference page of any kind. Under the “Related articles” tab and the subsection titled “primary sources”, there is a list of sources supposedly related to Borges (although as I clicked on a few of them, they don’t appear to have much connection). These does not appear to be the sources that the contributor used for the article though. The primary contributor whose name is on the main page is Emir Rodriguez-Monegal. He is a professor of Latin American Literature at Yale University and has published a book about Jorge Luis Borges. The other people listed under the “Contributor” list on the left hand side of the page are just editors who work for Britannica. Even though there are no references listed on the encyclopedia page, it would appear that he has used similar sources related to his book. The article has a short list of “further reading” resources at the end, which consist of biographies and critical essays. Rodrigues-Monegal describes them as being of highly researched academic quality.

Under the “History” section, we can see that it’s not nearly as extensive as Wikipedia’s. It shows that the article has been modified a handful of times by Britannica’s editors, though they have just merely edited titles of website, not the material itself.

Assessment of Articles
Upon investigation, the Wikipedia article appears to have been well constructed and researched. The information is very extensive and detailed. Regarding accessibility, the reader would have to have a background in philosophy and literature in order to comprehend some of the references and discussions. The helpful thing about Wikipedia though is that there are many hyperlinks throughout the articles to provide the reader with background information. For example, if the reader had no idea what magical realism meant, they could click on the hyperlink which would take them to another article that explains the genre in depth.

What is particularly interesting about this article, especially for our course, is that there is a section at the bottom for Authority Control, which is a library cataloguing term that refers to the organization of bibliographic information. There are many major sections (seven) and subsections (twenty) in the article, which would be really helpful for individuals looking for specific information about the author. Although there are many categories, not all of them are necessarily organized in the most efficient way. They could be grouped together in a way that makes it more cohesive and accessible. For example, the ‘Influences’ sections could all be tied together under one category with different subsections. This concern was echoed in one editor’s concern in the “talk” section of the article: see “Tidy”.

There is a lot of further information to explore in both the “Talk” and “History” sections of the article. They provide not only context into the process of how the information was developed, but can give you more insight into the credibility of the information. For example, the article was previously listed as a good article in the Language and Literature category, but has since been demoted from this status. In order for an article to meet the standards of a quality article, the work must "[be] written very well, contain factually accurate and verifiable information, are broad in coverage, neutral in point of view, stable, and illustrated, where possible, by relevant images with suitable copyright licenses".

Another red flag that I came across was a copyright issue from December 2010. There was a statement that read “This article has been reverted by a bot to this version as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) This has been done to remove User:Accotink2's contributions as they have a history of extensive copyright violation and so it is assumed that all of their major contributions are copyright violations” and then further states the seriousness of copyright violations, “For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source" . This finding gives Wikipedia more credibility as a legitimate source that follows the guidelines of academic integrity. Examining the “History” page provides further information. The Borges article has been consistently edited and updated over the past 13 years (the article began in 2001), which signifies that Borges’ life and works continue to be influential and relevant. The last edit was on November 1, 2014.

My initial assumption that Wikipedia is not a credible source for initial research information has been shifted. Investigation into the construct of this particular article has proven that they are highly monitored and scrutinized by multiple parties, including Wikipedia staff. Everything that is written must be properly referenced from legitimate and verifiable sources, in order to maintain academic integrity. Although there have been some issues with the Jorge Luis Borges article, they have been corrected and improved upon over the years. The beauty of Wikipedia is that its contents are "living documents" that people can manipulate and grow. They are excellent tools to use as research 'springboards' in order to gather background information and investigate further sources.

Although Encyclopaedia Britannica is generally thought of as a more credible source, this research has made me question this assumption. Aside from the fact that the information is not as chronological, organized, and detailed as Wikipedia, it is also suspicious that there are no references provided. It is also not as accessible since it is a paid service (or accessed only through an academic institution).