Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Los Rios Community College/ENGWR 300, College Composition TTh (Spring 2017)

Week 1
Welcome to your Wikipedia project's course timeline. This page will guide you through the Wikipedia project for your course. Be sure to check with your instructor to see if there are other pages you should be following as well.

Your 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.

To get started, please review the following handouts:


 * Editing Wikipedia pages 1–5
 * Evaluating Wikipedia


 * 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! Incomplete trainings will be reflected in your grade.
 * When you finish the trainings, practice by introducing yourself to a classmate on that classmate’s Talk page.

Week 2
It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles. You'll evaluate a Wikipedia article, and leave suggestions for improving it on the article's Talk page.


 * Complete the &quot;Evaluating Articles and Sources&quot; training (linked below).
 * Read two of the following Wikipedia articles.
 * DREAM Act
 * DACA
 * US Citizenship and Immigration Services
 * Blacklisting
 * Birthright citizenship in the United States
 * Birth tourism
 * Assembly Bill 540
 * Center for Immigration Studies
 * Immigration reform
 * While you read, evaluate the article. During your evaluation consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):
 * 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 * Is any information out of date?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?
 * Check the &quot;talk&quot; page - what conversation is the Wikipedia community having behind the scenes about how to represent these topics?
 * Is the article locked? What is the article rated?
 * How does the discussion or representation of these issues on Wikipedia compare to how we've discussed them in class? What does Wikipedia get &quot;right&quot;? What does Wikipedia get &quot;wrong&quot;?
 * In your sandbox, write a few sentences about what you learned during the evaluation.
 * Optional: Choose 1 questions relevant to one of the articles you're evaluating. Leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — Airportman97 (talk) 00:34, 20 April 2017 (UTC).

Week 3
First, review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook. Then, choose an article. Select a stub article on Wikipedia to copyedit and then improve. You can browse all the Stub Categories on Wikipedia here to find an article to work on. Once you've found one you want to work on, assign it to yourself on the Students tab above.

Second, read through it, doing an article evaluation like you learned last week. While you read, think about ways to improve the language, such as fixing grammatical mistakes. Then, make the appropriate changes. You don’t need to contribute new information to the article.

Week 4
Familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding a citation and making a small change to improve your article. Think back to when you did your article evaluation and copyedit last week. What small bit of information could you add to your article to improve it?

At the minimum, you should add 1-2 new sentences to your article and cite that statement to a reliable source, as you learned in the online training.