User:ProfGray/Exercise wife-sister edits

Wikipedia Assignment 2b: Introductory edits on wife-sister narratives Due: Week 4-5 2015 Return to the course page

Learning outcomes
See: User:ProfGray/ExerciseIntroEdit. This exercise focuses on facility with reading (or skimming) and utilizing academic articles for brief WP edits.

Principles behind the assigned steps
The assigned procedure is built upon the following principles:


 * 1) Talk to people. Raise questions or proposing improvements before editing on Talk pages. (Though other approached can work, too. Wikipedia runs more smoothly when people chat about a topic and develop good working relationships.
 * 2) Know your stuff and back it up. Do initial work to get your citations in order. Master the intellectual content!
 * 3) Find where you can add value. Evaluate existing WP article sections in comparison to selected academic sources:
 * 4) * Paraphrase the main claim or other aspects of an academic source
 * 5) Take small steps. Do low stakes WP editing, such as single sentences with verifiable citations.
 * 6) * You'll avoid frustration and get better feedback or collaborative input to the article.
 * 7) * Better to write in a sandbox, practice good paraphrasing and citing, and get vetted by peers, rather than commit plagiarism on this public website
 * 8) Be responsive to other WP editors, or classmates, who want to modify, dispute, or add to your contributions. Check the Article Talk page.
 * 9) * You are part of a Big Project. If your specific words get deleted or revised, let it go. You will find ways to contribute much more down the road.

Your scholarly sources and Wikipedia article(s)
For weeks 4-5, students will work in teams on Wife-sister narratives in Genesis, or related articles, such as Abimelech, Sarah, Rebekah, or Genesis.
 * Sources: Each team will receive scholarly, academic sources. The pdfs for academic sources are in Niihka > Resources > Wife-sister
 * At the Instructor's discretion, individuals or teams with sufficient Wikipedia and research skills may be welcome to edit alternative Articles


 * Objective: Each team will collaborate to place its sources' facts, findings, and claims into the Article(s) in a fair (WP:UNDUE) and neutral way

Step 1: Work as a Team player: Week 4

 * Coordinate and peer review work through your Team page (and User Talk pages), hence
 * Every day, check your watchlist
 * You MUST keep watch over any Article that you are editing
 * Keep watch over your Team page

Step 2: Prepare your list of scholarly sources: Week 3-4, due Monday Feb. 16

 * On your Sandbox or Team page, write a list of the scholarly sources (that I will provide you in class) for the Wife-sister article. You might include JSB annotations.
 * Use Wikipedia citation tools, which should be helpful.
 * Do not include any non-academic sources.
 * Optional: you can list relevant Biblical texts; however, except for a synopsis of a Biblical narrative, do NOT write sentences that are supported only by a verse WP:OR

Step 3: Analyze sources and compare to WP articles: Week 4
♥ Bring a printout of your notes to class. Student analysis and identified gaps/errors will be discussed in class!
 * Take proper notes on the scholarly sources:
 * Figure out the author's main claim(s). Put these in your own words -- do not mimic the author's sentence structure. You can use the author's theoretical or other key terms.
 * Find key facts and explanatory/analytical points
 * Outline arguments (evidence, reasons, claim) by scholars
 * Keep track of quotations in " " or QQ marks
 * Find gaps and errors in the wife-sister narrative or other WP articles, find where you can make a contribution with your notes!


 * Never put raw notes into Article or Article Talk pages. You can use your sandbox, or another user subpage, the Team page, or simply keep notes off Wikipedia.

Step 4: Write your sentences with refs, sandboxed: Week 4 by Monday, Feb. 16

 * Write up 1 to 5 sentences for the Wife-sister narratives or other Wikipedia article(s):
 * Put the sentences in your personal Sandbox or your Team page
 * Each sentence MUST include a reference to a scholarly source. Sentences can share a source, of course.
 * References must include the page number(s) in the scholarly article.
 * IDEA: To ease peer review, provide "exact quotations" from the scholar that supports your sentence!

Step 5: Introduce your ideas and role on Wikipedia Article Talk page(s): Week 4 by Wednesday, Feb. 18

 * 1) Introduce yourself! Each individual should mention their involvement and proposed edits.
 * 2) Put the Course Banner (assignment template) at the top of the Article Talk page, if it's not there already!
 * 3) *To do this, copy the following -- with the squiggly brackets -- and insert at the top of the article's Talk page:
 * 4) All proposed specific edits could include both the sentence(s) and mention your reliable, scholarly source.

Step 6: Peer review each other's sentences and references: Week 5, Monday, Feb. 23
Review another student's sentence and ref, and comment in their sandbox (or sandbox Talk):
 * Check the reference for all its elements (e.g., author, title, publication, date) and page number
 * Explain to the student any discrepancy


 * Look at the cited page yourself. Does the sentence fit the author's intended meaning?
 * Or look at the exact quotations provided by your Team member! (See "recommended" above)
 * Explain clearly if the sentence(s) do not fit the source


 * Does the sentence describe the scholar's idea and intent in a NEUTRAL (see WP:NPOV) manner? If the content is controversial or disputed, let the sentence attribute the idea to the scholar.

Step 7: Edit the assigned Article(s) with vetted sentences, due: Week 5, Wednesday, Feb. 25

 * All specific edits must include a reference to a reliable source.
 * For now, only use sources approved by our course
 * Exception: feel free to write section "lead" sentences that summarize the rest of the section. These can often simply rely on the sources cited below.


 * Your first edits should be vetted (peer reviewed) with your Team.
 * After your sentences are vetted (peer reviewed), put them in your portfolio and -- if feasible -- into the Article(s)
 * Don't worry if the sentence is reverted (rejected) by other Wikipedia users. To avoid reverts, you will first discuss your ideas on Article Talk pages. Regardless: Your grade does NOT depend on whether your contributions are actually accepted in Wikipedia.

♥ Place all your substantive edits, i.e., sentences and references, in your Portfolio page for grading. Or print them out. Or provide permanent links. Note: you do NOT have to edit the actual articles for a grade. You can submit proposed edits instead.