Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Chapman University/3,000 Years of Jewish History (Fall 2017)

Who are the Jews? When did their history begin? Through this course you will learn about Jewish history from antiquity to the present day. Every week we will look at a select period or event in Jewish history. We’ll roam the globe, from the Mediterranean to Eastern Europe, from Iran to France.

Week 1

 * 1) Create a user account: If you followed the link on Blackboard, you already created a user account.
 * 2) Enroll in our course: If you followed the link on Blackboard, you are already enrolled. You can confirm this by scrolling up this page and choosing the Students tab and making sure you are on it. If not, click the blue Enrollment button and use the passcode xctbzgjh
 * 3) While you are still logged in with your username, complete the training modules for this assignment (Wikipedia Essentials and Editing Basics), links below.
 * 4) When you are still logged in, leave a message on the Talk page of a classmate. How? Click on a username from enrolled students list; on upper left corner of their user page, just under the title &quot;User Contributions,&quot; select Talk tab. On upper right, select Edit tab. Add your sentence at the bottom of editable box. Keep it anonymous and neutral (e.g. “Hi, I’m a new Wikipedia user”). At the end of your sentence, add 4 tildes Chapmansh (talk) 19:17, 13 December 2017 (UTC). That ties the contribution to your username, like a signature.
 * 5) When you are still logged in, go to “Sandbox” in upper right corner. Experiment in your Sandbox, with the help of the Editing training module you just completed. In your Sandbox, write:
 * 6) * One regular sentence (anything you want, but nothing personal or offensive)
 * 7) * One heading
 * 8) * One sub-heading
 * 9) * A link to another Wikipedia page (any page)
 * 10) * Words in bold and italics
 * 11) * A list of references in which you have at least one footnote containing a reference (you can use a book we’re reading in class)

NOTE: this should be a Wikipedia-generated footnote &amp; reference list, following the instructions in the Editing training module.

Week 2
&quot;Wiki 2&quot; Wikipedia Assignment – Reading Summary

By now you have chosen a reading, either from the list provided on BB, or one approved by the instructor.

Submit a summary of 200-300 words of the reading you chose. Use footnotes, according to Chicago Manual of Style. Be comprehensive, summarizing the entire reading you chose, not just the first page or two. Focus on persuasive argumentation, crafting a cohesive narrative rather than stringing disconnected facts together. Aim for clean writing, as in your past two papers.

Week 3

 * 1) Complete the training module for this assignment (Evaluating Articles and Sources), link below.
 * 2) Hunt around Wikipedia for a topic related to our course material which you, with the help of the secondary source you read last week, can improve. This could be an article that is lacking key information, is wrong, or lacks references.

Note: if the article you choose is very long (e.g. &quot;Holocaust&quot; or &quot;Bible&quot;), you should only commit to working on a section of it, and clarify in this assignment what that section is. Don’t commit to working on an entire article if it is long, because you will be overwhelmed by the task.
 * 1) Sign up for that article by  visiting the 'Students' tab of this website while logged in, and finding your name in the list of students.
 * 2)  write a short essay (1-2 pages) answering:


 * 1) * Which article you chose (include URL) and why it is problematic.
 * 2) * How you will use an essay (the one you summarized in Wiki 2) to solve some of the problems. What you will do to make the article better: will you correct content? Add content? Both?

In this assignment, specify the page numbers from the secondary sources you plan to use.

Aim for an addition / correction of between 200 and 300 words, not including references.

''Remember: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place for primary-source analysis or primary research or new arguments. It is a place to summarize the findings of published works. On the rationale behind this rule, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

''

Week 5

 * 1) Complete the training module for this assignment (Sources and Citations), link below.
 * 2) By now you have received substantive feedback from me and have a clear idea of what you will edit. The next stage is to inform the Wikipedia community of your plans.
 * 3) * In the article’s Talk Page, write several sentences on what you intend to do. How to find the Talk Page? Every Wiki article, on the top left, has an &quot;Article&quot; tab and a &quot;Talk&quot; tab. You need the latter. If you're still confused, go back to the initial tutorial, which speaks about Talk Pages in general.
 * 4) * Be detailed regarding what needs adding, what needs correcting, and what sources you'll add. State your exact references (not &quot;The Stillman-Cohen debate&quot; or a Blackboard URL, because nobody outside of our class will know what you mean).
 * 5) * Be courteous (not &quot;this article is rambling&quot; but &quot;this article could use some clarification&quot;).
 * 6) * Be neutral (not “this is biased and I’m going to fix it,” which suggests you have the opposite bias – but rather “there is wrong or missing information here and I’m going to correct or add it”).
 * 7) * End your plan with an invitation to other Wiki editors to weigh in on your changes, e.g. “If anyone wants to comment on these changes, please let me know on this Talk Page or on my Talk Page.” Make sure you do this while you’re logged in, and sign after your post (Chapmansh (talk) 19:17, 13 December 2017 (UTC)).

Week 6

 * 1) Complete the training module for this assignment (Sandboxes and Mainspace), link below.
 * 2) If you received a comment on your Talk Page or on the article's Talk Page, consult the instructor on whether/how to respond to it.
 * 3) Improve the Wikipedia article you chose. Note: you may use readings from the syllabus too, but you must primarily use the reading you summarized in Wiki 2.
 * 4) It’s recommended to use your Sandbox first, preview what you’ve done, and then copy and paste from Sandbox into the article.
 * 5) 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.
 * 6) If you are creating a new article, write the article in your Sandbox, and follow these instructions on how to move it out of your Sandbox: Moving out of Your Sandbox

'''Grading Rubric:

'''

'''Improvement (20 points)

'''

____ I have incorporated all of the instructor’s comments on my previous Wiki assignments

'''Use of Evidence (20 points)

'''

____ I have used a secondary source from the readings handout and provided a full reference to it

____ When drawing on secondary source, I have paraphrased, i.e. I’ve used my own words

____ I have footnoted everything I paraphrased (no need to footnote each sentence, 1 per parag is fine)

'''Substantive Contribution (20 points)

____ I made a real difference by correcting misinformation and/or adding crucial information 

'''

____ My contribution ranges between 200 and 300 words, not including footnotes

'''Relevant Argumentation (20 points)

'''____ All the information I pull out of my secondary sources is directly relevant to the Wikipedia article

____ I stick to what I can prove and avoid generalizing (“All Jews did XYZ…”) or judging (&quot;Unfortunately...&quot;)

'''Style (20 points)

'''____ I avoid quotes or minimize them to very short extracts. Quotes never stand alone.

____ In the section I chose to edit, I corrected all sloppy writing, typos, grammar mistakes, run-on sentences, slang, and tense confusions, even those that had been made by previous Wikipedians.

Write a 2-3 page reflection paper. In it, first jot down


 * 1) The number of daily views your article gets. To check that, go to the article you edited. In the menu on the left, click &quot;Page Information&quot;. Scroll down to the end and click &quot;Page View Statistics&quot;. On the left under &quot;Date Type&quot; select &quot;Daily&quot;. All the way to the right of the page, you will see the average of daily views. Copy it to your paper.
 * 2) Whether other editors changed your edits, and if so, what they changed. To check that, go to the article you edited. On the top right, near the &quot;Edit&quot; tab, you will see a &quot;View history&quot; tab. Click it. This is a list of all recent edits made to the article. Each line shows when someone saved a change in the article, and each line shows the username that made that change. Find the line where you made your last contribution. Select the left-column radio button for that line. Then select the right-column radio button for the topmost line in the list, which is the current version. Click the &quot;Compare selected revisions&quot; button. On the right half of the page, you'll be able to see what changes (if any) were made to your edits.

If you're the last person who edited your article, your change will be the topmost line, which means nobody changed your contributions.

Then write your reflection. Here are some questions which could inspire you.


 * What did you learn from this project?
 * What surprised you about this project?
 * What did you like or dislike about this project?
 * Did your Wikipedia submission differ from your initial plans? Why?
 * If other Wikipedia users edited your submission, did you agree with those edits? If nobody edited your changes, would you like someone to edit them in the future?
 * If you had to give advice to someone about to take this class, what tips would you give them about the Wikipedia assignment?
 * How do you feel about writing something that gets viewed x number of times? Would you like to see more assignments which have this global an impact, or fewer?
 * Do you think you will ever edit Wikipedia again, in your own free time? Why or why not?

This paper will be evaluated for its thoughtfulness. Provide an insightful analysis, with clear, detailed examples of what you are saying. Aim for an in-depth reflection rather than a grocery list of the above questions. First person is fine, even recommended, for this paper. This is a chance for you to reflect creatively. Embrace it!