User:Lepeletier/sandbox

Week 2 Question Answers

 * 1) A content gap may be a period of time or a group of facts on a certain topic that is missing that may be important concerning the topic. Possible ways to identify them would be to read through the article and check if the article seems incomplete in the writing. Also, checking the references and whether or not the information goes fluidly in a timeline. There should be a timeline sort of feel to the facts presented.
 * 2) A content gap might arise because the article may be left and unedited for a long period of time. When the new editor begins to add information, they may be only adding information from the current time period leaving a gap in the information. Some ways to remedy them would be to always check if the information you're adding is not only the most up-to-date, but also the information that follows closely to the last information added.
 * 3) It does not matter who writes Wikipedia as long as they understand the rules and structures of the website. They should use reliable resources and reference all the facts and to be unbiased in their writing. Basically, as long as the person writing follows everything we have learned and give correct information, it doesn't matter if the person is a mathematician or a student trying to complete an assignment.
 * 4) To be "unbiased" on Wikipedia is to share pure facts without giving personal opinions that may influence the thoughts and views of the reader that can all be referenced and sourced. The Wiki definition of "unbiased" is practically the same as my own. Facts should present a topic in its truest form from a variety of perspectives and should be able to be referenced and sourced. I should be able to use the facts to form my own opinions without hvaving been influenced by a biased source. Lepeletier (talk) 19:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Week 4 Question Answers

 * 1) Blog posts are considered poor sources of reliable information because they can be biased. In a blog post, the person writing the post can contribute information information that may only be supportive of one viewpoint. They may also have inaccurate information which then causes you to have inaccurate information from an inaccurate source. Blog posts can sometimes give you great information, but it is better off using the credible sources the blog post used rather then the blog post itself. The post could have also inaccurately relayed the information from a credible source.  Press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information because they can also be biased. While press releases are given by a primary source, the actual statement may actually be used in a way that is biased. Most newspapers are supposed to remain impartial, but realistically we know that most news sources are a bit biased and we must look at multiple different news sources to find all the relevant information. These press releases may be used by news sources and media platforms to portray certain people or events as whatever they may want it to appear. Any statement taken out of context can turn a man into a monster and a monster into a man.
 * 2) You may not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about the company because they are clearly only going to be more positive towards themselves and remove any information they find may harm the company's image. While the information may be useful to get a first glance view of what the company is and what it does, it also does not accurately present reviews or negative press they may have received. While some information is good from the main website, there is also another side of the company that may not be portrayed by the company's site.
 * 3) A copyright violation is when you use works protected by the law without permission. Plagiarism is when you take someones work and completely take it as your own. Copyright infringement doesn't require for you to claim it as your own completely, it only means that you are reproducing something without permission from the original owner. For example, if I have a Michael Buble CD and I make multiple copies of it to distribute to people, that would be copyright infringement. If I decide to take that same CD and put my name on it while making multiple copies and somehow getting people to believe that I have the voice of a man, that would be plagiarism and probably also copyright as well.
 * 4) There are a few good techniques that can be used to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism. One technique would be to write down notes and then writing from the notes instead of the original articles or sources. Another technique would be to record yourself trying to explain the content to a friend or just to yourself in the mirror and then use the recorded material to write. In both techniques, you are taking the original content and not only learning it, but also explaining it which helps you put it into your own words to write your article.

Week 4 Article Link and Explanation
Louis-Michel le Peletier, marquis de Saint-Fargeau

The article I have decided to tackle is that of Louis-Michel le Peletier himself. I have chosen this topic because there is very little information on the Wikipedia page itself. I have already found research on le Peletier and there is certain information that is missing which could be interesting to add. I am also waiting for information from the FIU library that may also help me add more information on him. It does not seem to be a very active page since there is only one comment on the talk page and it seems that there is not much interaction other than that. The entire page is full of short sentences that could be expanded on through information I believe to have found to accompany it.

Louis-Michel le Peletier

 * To this article, I plan to add talk about how Le Peletier is known as a martyr of the revolution. Despite the fact that almost every article I have found through all of FIU's resources practically mention only this fact, it is not on the Wikipedia page. Also, something I thought would be important to add is also how he was a freemason. Freemasons apparently had a decently significant role in the revolution so knowing that Le Peletier is one could be helpful to others reading the page. Lastly, there should be more information on the ways that Le Peletier affected education. He wrote papers and proposals that are not spoken of at all. He is known almost only for his fight for educational reform and there is only one not cited sentence about it on his page.
 * Bibliography:
 * "Political Clubs." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, edited by David L. Sills, vol. 12, Macmillan, 1968, pp. 214-218. Gale Virtual Reference Library, ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url= http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=miam11506&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX3045000957&asid=5b973ea5f0adfccc2f83ed018b199528 . Accessed 16 Feb. 2017.
 * LIVESEY, JAMES. "Republicanism." Europe 1789-1914: Encyclopedia of the Age of Industry and Empire, edited by John Merriman and Jay Winter, vol. 4, Charles Scribner's Sons, 2006, pp. 1958-1964. Gale Virtual Reference Library, ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url= http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=miam11506&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX3446900702&asid=98c2ab49ec52acf19cb3480650c50c44 . Accessed 16 Feb. 2017.
 * "The Religion of Reason in Revolutionary France." World History Encyclopedia, edited by Alfred J. Andrea and Carolyn Neel, vol. 16: Era 7: The Age of Revolutions, 1750-1914, ABC-CLIO, 2011, pp. 914-916. Gale Virtual Reference Library, ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url= http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=miam11506&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX2458803192&asid=2b7d29d45dbe91608bea1b3a6d157bd0 . Accessed 16 Feb. 2017.
 * BAGGERMAN, ARIANNE, and RUDOLF M. DEKKER. "Enlightenment, The." Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood: In History and Society, edited by Paula S. Fass, vol. 1, Macmillan Reference USA, 2004, pp. 321-324. Gale Virtual Reference Library, ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url= http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy.fiu.edu/ps/i.do?p=GVRL&sw=w&u=miam11506&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CCX3402800152&asid=24e02ea190a393a23075f64fa8521b9d . Accessed 16 Feb. 2017.
 * "Louis-Michel Lepeletier de Saint-Fargeau." Merriam Webster's Biographical Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, 1995. Biography in Context, ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url= http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/K1681156466/BIC1?u=miam11506&xid=78c6185d . Accessed 16 Feb. 2017.
 * Draft:
 * To improve the article, I would expand more on the topics of education and on the fact that he is a martyr of the revolution and a Freemason. He is very importantly known for his want for educational reform so the expansion should include some of his writings and who he worked with as well. Being a martyr of the revolution, people even made busts dedicated to him so this information should be included in the article. Also, the fact that he was a Freemason should at least be mentioned in the article since being a Freemason during the Revolution was kind of a big deal.

Suzanne le Peletier ( I am still debating on this because I am not sure I have enough information to really make a good enough page.

 * Suzanne does not have her own Wikipedia page but I thought that she may be worth writing about. She was named the "Daughter of the State" and was a celebrity after her father's death. She seemed to also be a part of an important group of powerful women during her time. It would be nice to at least contribute some information on her for others to be able to read.


 * Bibliography:
 * Heuer, Jennifer. “Adopted Daughter of the French People: Suzanne Lepeletier and Her Father, the National Assembly.” French Politics, Culture & Society, vol. 17, no. 3/4, 1999, pp. 31–51., www.jstor.org/stable/42843080.
 * Draft:
 * Suzanne le Peletier is the daughter of Louis-Michel le Peletier, marquis de Saint-Fargeau (add link to page). After the death of her father, she became the "Daughter of the State" with her new father being the National Assembly. She was a celebrity in France and was well known in her efforts for women's rights during her time.

Week 6 Questions, Drafts, and Peer Review

 * 1) Wikipedia's definition of neutrality allows for everyone to come up with their own thoughts and ideas. We have been told since the beginning that we are only supposed to be sharing the facts and not what we feel on these opinions. The idea of solely sharing facts that are backed up with references is a great way to provide information with others as well as realistically portraying what an encyclopedia is. This answer is a bit funny because mostly it is the opposite of what I just explained, but the question called for it. The point is, Wikipedia's sense that information should be presented neutrally is helpful in the sense that no one is being persuaded towards a way of thinking. This is different than other sources of information, such as news websites, that mostly lean to a certain side despite their best attempts, or lack thereof, to stay neutral themselves. Of course, with neutrality there could still be bias by only presenting the facts that represent the way of thinking that the writer is trying to portray to the reader. The overwhelming information that leans toward the good or bad side of the topic may impact neutrality within Wikipedia. The definition of neutrality in Wikipedia makes it harder for people to be biased in the writing, but in the end, there are loopholes that may not stop bias, even though it is a good place to begin.
 * 2) The existence of Wikipedia has affected the way that every person with access to the Internet receives information. There are hundreds of thousands of different pages on different topics that we may feel the need to find quick and easy-to-find information to. Suddenly, most people don't have to scroll much farther than the first link of their search engines to find out the color of the surface of Mars. With ease, people could even scan dozens of pages of information simply by clicking on highlighted text within the original text they were looking at. It's almost fascinating and breath-taking how easily we have access to so much information. Wikipedia also gives us access to a bunch of different references which is awesome if you're trying to research a certain topic. Despite your best efforts to pay attention to your 59 year-old English professor who swears they will take off points for even glancing at the Wikipedia website, sometimes sources are not easy to find and you just need a little bit of help. By going to the page where they speak of, for example, Piano Man by Elton John, you'll learn that there are bunches of references that will help you find a footing to your research. Of course, to quote Uncle Ben, "with great power comes great responsibility" and that leads us to the limits of Wikipedia as a source of information. As much as we would like to trust that everyone is neutral while presenting their facts and that all their information can be traced back to super secure and reliable sources, this is not always the case. Sometimes, we must use more than just Wikipedia to get information. Wikipedia is a great source for quick access to information, but it is not as reliable as most would really enjoy. As previously stated, we should use Wikipedia as a way to get footing in our research and as a way to start, but it should not be cited nor should it be used as a main source. In reality, the sources that we should really be using are those that are used by the Wikipedia page itself if they are reliable at all; that is another limit that Wikipedia has. If no one is really frequently checking up on the article, there could be citations that are incorrect or information that is misplaced. While there are constantly collaborations, sometimes topics do not get touched upon at all after the creation of the page. We should keep these limits in mind while creating our own pages because we want to not only create a reliable page for our characters, but we also want sources that are reliable to help others find information from our sources as well. We should strive to be the beginning of a beautiful journey through the French Revolution and the people involved (since that is mainly what we are talking about).
 * 3) * Side note: The quote I used from Spider-Man was also believed to be traced back to an anonymous writer in the French Revolution which I thought was pretty cool. I have cited both the video I watched and the actual quote from the French Revolution by following the sources used by my original source and my original source's sources. You get what I mean.
 * 4) Sources that are typically not considered to be reliable are mainly personal blogs, some news sources, and even some websites that do not end with .edu, .gov, or org. This might create problems because sometimes there is very little information on certain topics and we seem to grasp at any sources we can find. By looking at these sources, we may or may not be using reliable information in our data and it causes us to possibly write incorrect information on our topic. This is especially bad since we're doing research to add to a Wikipedia page that is going to be viewed by a good amount of people. If the information being spread is incorrect and nobody really corrects it, then the while world may fall into a pit of unknowingness that there was a lie about how great Le Peletier's hair smelled or something.
 * 5) If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now? If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, we'd probably have many more primary sources listed for events that have occurred during those times that contributors now are not able to talk about. Details of wars, battles, famous actresses and actors, all would be much more in depth because there would be information that had been added by people who came in contact with probably more reliable sources than we do. Most Wikipedia pages on theories about what happened in, for example, Object Permanence or the Arakelov theory would be more detailed or may even have contributions from the scientists and mathematicians themselves that actually came up with them. The contributors would also be different because people typically write about things that interest them, but also things that are more towards their present lives and that has affected them more personally. If people had been writing on Wikipedia since 1917, there would be a lot more contributors and a lot more people discussing even the information that is irrelevant to us because it was relevant to them. 100 years from now, Wikipedia is probably going to be, for the most part, a good portion of articles that seem obsolete because no one is going to really be searching Kim Kardashian, the same way we don't search up Johanna Westerdijk on a regular basis. There will also be millions of new articles, articles that may be completely deleted or changed because they are theories that are proved incorrect, and the information about events that happen during the next 100 years will probably be a little more reliable because we actually lived the times and are able to show what happened through many more primary sources than you would use in an article about Germany in WW2.

Educational Plan
(Add last paragraph of career to this heading)

Le Peletier collaborated with Robespierre to create the Plan d'Éducation Nationale which contributed to the fight towards education in France.

Suzanne Le Peletier
Suzanne le Peletier is the daughter of Louis-Michel le Peletier, marquis de Saint-Fargeau. After the death of her father, she became the "Daughter of the State" with her new father being the National Assembly. She was a celebrity in France and was well known in her efforts for women's rights during her time.

Educational Plan
(Add last paragraph of career to this heading)

Le Peletier collaborated (? not sure) with Robespierre to create the Plan d'Éducation Nationale which contributed to the fight towards education in France. Emphasize the fact that he was a famous martyr (which is surprisingly not anywhere)
 * https://books.google.com/books?id=lBX4-PoMuHIC&pg=PA208&lpg=PA208&dq=lepeletier+worked+with+robespierre+on+a+plan+for+education&source=bl&ots=92Yte5xWDD&sig=kcr2gMGxqleO0hhYCUrI-s5eiC4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwja2ZuUt_LSAhWIdSYKHXmMB0EQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=lepeletier%20worked%20with%20robespierre%20on%20a%20plan%20for%20education&f=false
 * Religious figures were replaced by busts of him as well as colleagues such as Jean-Paul Marat

He was a freemason during the revolution.

Suzanne Le Peletier
Suzanne le Peletier is the daughter of Louis-Michel le Peletier, marquis de Saint-Fargeau. After the death of her father, she became the "Daughter of the State" with her new father being the National Assembly. She was a celebrity in France and was well known in her efforts for women's rights during her time.

Adoption
Suzanne was adopted by the National Assembly after being put under the care of her uncles.

Her father was a famous martyr of the revolution that got killed.

Marriage
Wanted to marry a foreigner which led to a lot being said by the government and National Assembly
 * Dutch man
 * Jean-François De Witt
 * Uncles disapproved
 * There was a petition and a court case from both sides
 * Suzanne brought into light a law "7 September 1793" that allows her to marry since her parents are dead.
 * Two legal reasons for opposition due to De Witt's possible charges
 * "Notorious disorder"
 * "Non-rehabilitation after a judgment carrying the penalty of infamy"
 * If found not guilty, Suzanne would be allowed to marry him
 * Ends up marrying cousin (Getty)
 * This led to a change in the way France titled her. Suzanne's role in France went from being a symbol of revolutionary radicalism to a leading lady of the royalist party.

Legal Case of 1797
Since Suzanne was adopted by the nation of France after the death of her father Louis-Michel le Peletier. Adoption by the state meant that she was emancipated from her uncles. This later became an issue to her uncles because Suzanne wanted to marry a Dutch man by the name of Jean-François De Witt which was debt-ridden. Due to their lack of legal power over Suzanne, they were unable to convince her to not marry the Dutch man. Her uncles brought their concerns to the French legislature and asked the state to fulfill its role as her father and stop Suzanne from denationalizing herself by marrying a Dutch man.

This case brought Suzanne into the public light once again after the death of her father in 1973. The public debated upon the powers of national adoption and the defining factors of family and state relations. Her engagement to a foreigner also led to pubic debates upon citizenship and its significance, especially for women and whether or not marriage impacts their citizenship.

Debaters upon the case brought up contradictory points. Those who supported Suzanne talked about father-centered families with a subordinate wife and children yet they stated that she did not need parental control. Instead, they supported Suzanne by emphasizing individual rights and the rationality a young woman has. Those who supported her uncles reminded that Suzanne was "first daughter of the republic" and that she was a symbol of being French and revolutionary. Despite that, they still spoke of her incapability of being an independent citizen of France.