User talk:WoodSnake/Archive 5

Copyright violations
Hi, please could you make sure your students understand our policy on Copyright violations. I noticed that User:Openevilsky copied and pasted text from another source without permission to the Avoidant personality disorder article. Looking at their other contributions, I saw that they are one of your students. From this list, the first two students whose contributions I spot-checked have also added copyright violations to articles (User:Jialuzeng and User:Moktiff). Please make this a priority, I dread to think of the consequences to Wikipedia if hundreds of your students are doing the same thing to get academic credit. The Plagiarism guideline may also be of use here. -- Beloved

Freak 10:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Wondering if it would be a good idea to subtract 1% from the students mark if they 1) to closely paraphrase the source they are using 2) do not properly format a reference or use a reference that is not deemed high quality by WP:MEDRS (ie. a review article)-- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:06, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I have posted an announcement to my students, making them aware of these issues, and asking them to look closely at their edits to insure they have used their own words, and that they have cited sources properly. Keep in mind there are 1600 students in this class. I will do everything I can to make sure that the additions are much more signal than noise, and we are doing research to quantify this partly to insure that what we are doing is wise. WoodSnake (talk) 20:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Great thanks. Reading over the marking I believe that it is just as important for the students to be able to lose marks as it is for them to be able to gain them. May be minus 1 mark for plagiarism, minus 1 mark for not responding/addressing talk page comments, and minus 1 mark for not formatting references properly? Hopefully we will have a chance to talk tomorrow.-- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Springtime on Wikipedia
... is that time of year when established editors have to begin cleaning up after student edits. Please remind your students of WP:MEDRS (use secondary reviews, not primary sources, to source medical text), WP:MEDMOS (organization of medical articles), WP:COPYVIO, and might you ask them not to edit featured articles without first discussing on article talk, since it is unlikely a beginning psych student will add something to a featured article that hasn't already been discussed? Perhaps you can point them at Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-30/Dispatches? "1%: Editing on Psychology-Related Wikipedia article by adding one or more sentences that provide new information relevant to the article AND providing a citation that backs up the information you added" just encourages them to add any old text to articles, regardless of sourcing quality. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 14:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Phantosmia
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Discussion needs your input
Hi Steve, I'm an online ambassador with the Wikipedia Education Program. There is a discussion about your class here. It's very important that you engage in some dialogue about best practices with the editing community. Hope to hear from you at the noticeboard, The Interior  (Talk) 23:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks much for your explanatory post!--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 14:58, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Preliminary numbers on your student contributions
A few editors have been evaluating the work done by your students, to try to determine if their contributions are a net positive or a net negative for the encyclopedia. We are still doing the analysis, but the numbers so far are discouraging. Of 19 students for which we have been able to determine the source of their contributions, 16 plagiarized text with little or no modification from their source. You can see the analysis so far here; I'm counting the "Yes" and "No" answers in the "Plagiarism/copyvio" column.

The proportion may change, of course, as we do more analysis. However, this is a high enough number that I'd like to request that you ask your students not to edit Wikipedia further until we have more data. Would you please consider doing that?

If you'd like to take a look at what we consider plagiarism, there are links to the relevant student contributions in each row, and there are comments that should help you identify the issue. There are also some examples explicitly laid out at the end of the page. It may be that some of the editors whose contributions we are analyzing are not in fact your students; if so, please let us know. I suspect most or all are, however, because almost all of them use University of Toronto URLs in their referencing.

Thanks. -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

== Admin noticeboard incident regarding your edits/class ==

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

-- Colin°Talk 19:02, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for taking time to participate at length in that discussion. – SJ  +  23:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments
I consider your comments here inappropriate and borderline legal trheats. We do not tolerate this on Wikipedia and it is being discussed further here . Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 05:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Go  Phightins  !  20:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)