Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Los Medanos Community College/English 100-7190 (Spring)

English 100-Tu/Th 11-12:20

Week 1
Welcome to our Wikipedia project's timeline. This page will guide you through the Wikipedia project for English 100.

This page breaks down writing a Wikipedia article into a series of steps, or milestones. These steps include online trainings to help you get started on Wikipedia.

Our course has also been assigned a Wikipedia Content Expert. Check your Talk page for notes from them. You can also reach them through the &quot;Get Help&quot; button on this page.

This project is designed to jumpstart your thinking and discussion for our final essay of the semester, Essay #3, which asks the question:

"Are online websites like Wikipedia credible as sources of information?"

All of the work and thinking that you do in these three weeks will provide the foundation for your stance on that essential question. Not everything in this project will be graded, however the following items will earn points:


 * Each of the 6 online trainings:
 * 5 points each for a total of 30 points in the &quot;Everything Else&quot; category of your grade.
 * You cannot get credit if you don't have a username.
 * Your username must be enrolled on this course page. Check the Students tab to find your name.


 * The Article Critique in Week 2:
 * 20 points in the Practice Writing category of your grade.


 * The Wikipedia Reflection in Week 3:
 * 20 points in the Practice Writing category of your grade.

This is due Thursday 4/20 before class.


 * Create an account and join this course page, using the enrollment link your instructor sent you.
 * It's time to dive into Wikipedia. Below, you'll find the first set of online trainings you'll need to take. New modules will appear on this timeline as you get to new milestones. Be sure to check back and complete them! These trainings are required for your course.
 * When you finish the trainings, practice by introducing yourself to a classmate on that classmate's Talk page.
 * As you get started, please review the following handouts:
 * Editing Wikipedia pages 1–5
 * Evaluating Wikipedia

This is due Tuesday 4/25 before class.

It's time to think critically about Wikipedia. 1. Complete the &quot;Evaluating Articles and Sources&quot; training (linked below).

2. Create a section in your sandbox titled &quot;Wikipedia Evaluation&quot; where you'll leave notes about your observations and learnings.

3. Read three of the following:


 * One Wikipedia article
 * Credibility
 * Advocacy
 * Privilege
 * One essay about Wikipedia
 * Wikipedia as a Tool for 21st Century Teaching and Learning
 * Why Wikipedia matters for women in science
 * The Earth is flat? Check Wikipedia
 * How Wikipedia is hostile to women
 * For Wikipedia, the doctor is in... class
 * One of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines
 * Notability
 * Conflict of interest
 * Neutral point of view
 * Undue weight
 * No original research

As you read, consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):

For the Wikipedia article: 


 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

For the essay about Wikipedia: 


 * What did you learn about Wikipedia that you didn't already know?

For the policy or guideline: 


 * What surprises you about this specific rule or guideline?
 * If you had to summarize this rule or guideline into one sentence, how would you describe it?

'''Come to class on Tuesday with notes about each article you read. You can print these from your Sandbox if that's easier.'''

Week 2
This is due Thursday 4/27 before class.

Think about two content areas that you are interested in learning more about. Ever want to learn more about underwater basket weaving? Now's your chance. Want to learn more about that Forensic Science major you're considering: here you go. For me, maybe I want to learn more about what attracted Morgan Freeman to his recent metaphysical trends and the history of Fontina cheese in Spain. Choose two content areas you're interested in and start exploring. Once you've found two articles to read, create a title in your Sandbox called &quot;Article Evaluation&quot; and provide the titles there.

Your assignment is to fully evaluate your articles; word requirement is approximately 400-600 words. As you read you can leave your notes in your Sandbox under &quot;Article Evaluation.&quot; Use these questions to guide you (but don't feel limited to these):

  List your article and a link to its Wikipedia page. Briefly describe the article you're critiquing (e.g., length, amount of detail).   Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?  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 there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?</li> <li>Check the &quot;talk&quot; page of the article. What is the Wikipedia community saying about your topic? </li> <li>What is the article rated? For your final project, you'll be asked to make improvements to an article. We'd like to focus your improvements on articles that are rated stub, start or c-class according to Wikipedia's article assessment rating.

</li> <li>Optional: Choose at least 1 question relevant to one of the articles you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. '''Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — Mariagudino (talk) 02:55, 10 May 2017 (UTC). '''</li></ul>

Upload your article critique to Canvas before class Thursday 4/27.

This is due Tuesday 5/2 before class.

Now we're going to work on article stubs: short, underdeveloped articles. These articles aren't finished and need further review, addition, revision, and/or most of all, information.

Spend some time looking through the list of Categories here. Some examples: Category: Rock Music Stubs Category: Comedy Film Stubs Category: Nursing Stubs (there's a category for almost everything here)

After you've perused the categories, choose one topic and then one article that you feel you can make the most impact on for this project. Assign yourself the article topic next to your name on the Students tab above.

For your article, find at least 2 new academic, peer reviewed sources that you could use to improve the content. List your Works Cited by creating a new section in your sandbox called &quot;Works Cited&quot; - you should use the &quot;cite&quot; tool on the Visual Editor for help with this.

Please also take the &quot;Sources and Citations&quot; and the &quot;Plagiarism&quot; trainings, linked below.

Week 3
This is due Thursday 5/4 before class.

First, review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.

Second, familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding a citation and making a small change to improve your article. You can draft your contribution in your sandbox to start, but eventually you should copy and paste your improvement and the correctly formatted citation into the article &quot;live&quot; - at a minimum, you should add 1-2 sentences to an article of your choice, and cite that statement to a reliable source, as you learned in the online training.

Please also take the &quot;Sandboxes and Mainspace&quot; training, linked below.

Additional Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9

This is due Tuesday 5/9 before class.

Write a reflective essay (500 words) on your Wikipedia contributions.

Consider the following questions as you reflect on your Wikipedia assignment:


 * Critiquing articles: What did you learn about Wikipedia during the article evaluation? How did you approach critiquing the article you selected for this assignment? How did you decide what to add to your chosen article?
 * Summarizing your contributions: include a summary of your edits and why you felt they were a valuable addition to the article. How does your article compare to earlier versions?
 * Feedback: Did you receive feedback from other Wikipedia editors, and if so, how did you respond to and handle that feedback?
 * Wikipedia generally: What did you learn from contributing to Wikipedia? How does a Wikipedia assignment compare to other assignments you've done in the past? How can Wikipedia be used to improve public understanding of our field/your topic? Why is this important?