User:Matthew.murdoch/Positive Psychology

In small groups (about 5 people), you’ll be selecting an article related to positive psychology that’s in serious need of work (or has yet to be created). Check out WikiProject Psychology to get an idea of just how much work needs to be done: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Psychology

In this assignment, you’ll start by learning the basics of Wikipedia editing and some community standards. After selecting an article, you and your group mates will complete a series of small tasks over the term to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia. While doing so, you'll gradually be putting together your article before making it live for all the world to see. In the end, each member of your group is expected to contribute the equivalent of about one 500 word section.

Note: A lot of things go into a Wikipedia article, so your contributions are likely to consist of more than text - hence "the equivalent of about" 500 words. The quality and quantity of your references (both external and to other Wikipedia pages) and interactions with classmates (and other Wikipedians) will influence your grade. As will the organization of your article, your (effective) use of (relevant) images, and anything else that you might add beyond text (e.g., a table, if your article calls for it).

Week 1 (2015-06-29):  Wikipedia essentials, Editing basics, Exploring the topic area

 * Overview of the course, including an intro to positive psychology
 * Introduction to how Wikipedia will be used in the course
 * Understanding Wikipedia as a community, we'll discuss its expectations and etiquette
 * Intro Reading: Editing Wikipedia


 * Basics of editing
 * Anatomy of Wikipedia articles, what makes a good article, how to distinguish between good and bad articles
 * Collaborating and engaging with the Wiki editing community
 * Tips on finding the best articles to work on for class assignments
 * PLEASE READ: Using Talk Pages handout and Evaluating Wikipedia brochure


 * Be prepared to discuss some of your observations about Wikipedia articles your topic area that are missing or could use improvement.
 * PLEASE READ: Choosing an article
 * PLEASE READ: Editing Wikipedia articles on psychology


 * Create an account, do the readings listed here, and complete the online training for students. During this training, you will make edits in a sandbox and learn the basic rules of Wikipedia.


 * Create a User page, and then click the "enroll" button on the top left of this course page.


 * To practice editing and communicating on Wikipedia, introduce yourself on the user talk page of one of your classmates, who should also be enrolled in the table at the bottom of the page.
 * Explore topics related to your topic area to get a feel for how Wikipedia is organized. What areas seem to be missing? As you explore, make a mental note of articles that seem like good candidates for improvement.


 * Review pages 4-7 of the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure. This will give you a good, brief overview of what to look for in other articles, and what other people will look for in yours.


 * Evaluate an existing Wikipedia article related to the class (doesn't have to be from the sign-up table!), and leave a suggestion for improving it on the article's talk page.
 * A few questions to consider (don't feel limited to these, and don't feel like you need to address all of them - 1 or 2 is fine):
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? For articles that provide medical/psychiatric info, check whether each reference meets the requirements for reliable medical sources.
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * For medical/psychiatric topics, does the structure follow the recommendations of the manual of style for medicine-related articles?


 * All students have Wikipedia user accounts, have completed the online training, and are listed on the course page.

Week 2 (2015-07-06):  Using sources and choosing articles

 * PLEASE READ: Citing sources on Wikipedia and Avoiding plagiarism on Wikipedia.
 * Be prepared to discuss close paraphrasing, plagiarism, and copyright violations on Wikipedia.


 * Your Goals for Week 3


 * Add 1–2 sentences of new information (or edit the equivalent) to a Wikipedia article related to the class (note: doesn't have to be from the sign-up table - feel free to choose anything).


 * Matt has created a list of potential topics for your main project. Choose the one you will work on (recommended) or suggest something that isn't on the list (must be relevant, in need of work, contain minimal psychiatric/medical info, and doable within this course).


 * By Next Week
 * Matt evaluates article selections, with suggestions and groups ready to go by next week.

Week 3 (2015-07-13):  Finalizing topics, starting research, and drafting starter articles

 * Discuss the topics students will be working on, and determine strategies for researching and writing about them.


 * Talk about Wikipedia culture and etiquette, and revisit the concept of sandboxes and how to use them.
 * Q&A session with instructor about interacting on Wikipedia and getting started with writing.


 * By the start of next week, a member of your group should mark your article's talk page with a banner to let other editors know you're working on it. To add the banner, add this code in the top section of the talk page:


 * Compile a bibliography of relevant, reliable sources and post it to the talk page of the article you are working on. Begin reading the sources. Make sure to check in on the talk page (or watchlist) to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.


 * If you are starting a new article, write a 3–4 paragraph summary version of your article—with citations—in your Wikipedia sandbox. If you are improving an existing article, create a detailed outline reflecting your proposed changes, and post this for community feedback, along with a brief description of your plans, on the article’s talk page. Make sure to check back on the talk page often and engage with any responses.
 * Begin working with classmates and other editors to polish your short starter article and fix any major issues.
 * Continue research in preparation for expanding your article.


 * All students have started editing articles or drafts on Wikipedia.

Week 4 (2015-07-20):  Moving articles to the main space

 * We'll discuss moving your article out of your sandboxes and into Wikipedia's main space (if you're not doing live edits - read Moving out of your sandbox)
 * A general reminder: Don't panic if your contribution disappears, and don't try to force it back in.
 * Check to see if there is an explanation of the edit on the article's talk page. If not, (politely) ask why it was removed.
 * Contact Matt or a Wikipedia Content Expert and let them know.
 * Another reminder: Don't panic if you get into 'edit battles' with other users. Matt will see the record of your contributions whether or not another user is deleting/changing them.


 * Start moving your sandbox articles into main space.
 * If you are expanding an existing article, copy your edit into the article. If you are making many small edits, save after each edit before you make the next one. Do NOT paste over the entire existing article, or large sections of the existing article.
 * If you are creating a new article, do NOT copy and paste your text, or there will be no record of your work history. Follow these instructions on how to move your work.


 * Optional: For new articles or qualifying expansions of stubs, compose a one-sentence “hook,” nominate it for “Did you know,” (see detailed instructions) and monitor the nomination for any issues identified by other editors. Wiki Education Foundation staff can provide support for this process.


 * Begin expanding your article into a comprehensive treatment of the topic.

Week 5 (2015-07-27):  Building articles, Creating first draft, Getting and giving feedback

 * Discuss uploading images and adding images to articles.
 * Share experiences and discuss problems.
 * Refreshers: "Illustrating Wikipedia" (pgs 4-7) and "Evaluating Wikipedia article quality" (handed out originally earlier in the course)


 * As a group, peer review your classmate's article (e.g., each student reviews one section). Leave suggestions on the article talk page.
 * Copy-edit the reviewed article - look for typos, broken links, NPOV issues, and other little errors. Feel free to make small edits as you go - we'll all see what you've done, so there's no need to keep track of this anywhere else.
 * Please have at least one member of your group add your group's name (e.g., "The Forgiveness Group") to the talk page of the article you plan to review.
 * Note: Each group will receive feedback from only one other group. If you see that another group has already indicated their interest in an article, you need to sign up for a different one.


 * Every group has received feedback from another group, making sure that every article has been reviewed.

Week 6 (2015-08-03):  Due date

 * Discussion of Wikipedia experience so far.
 * Refresher on criteria for assignment
 * Note: If there are any issues with your contributions (e.g., too little; poor quality), Matt will let you know at the start of the week.


 * On the basis of another group's feedback, make all suggested changes to your group's article
 * If you disagree with a suggested change, please respond to it in the talk page (and indicate why... respectfully, of course).
 * If you have any material in your sandbox, move it to your Wikipedia page
 * By the end of the week, all pages should be live. You can continue making edits for as long as you'd like, but this is the last week that will be considered for grading.


 * Students have finished all their work on Wikipedia that will be considered for grading.