Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Rutgers University/Language and Law (Spring 2019)

Topics in forensic linguistics

Week 6
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.

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.

Your course has also been assigned a Wikipedia 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. (To avoid hitting Wikipedia's account creation limits, this is best done outside of class. Only 6 new accounts may be created per day from the same IP address.)
 * It's time to dive into Wikipedia. Above, 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 7
It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles. You'll evaluate a Wikipedia article related to the course and submit your responses to the seven questions below on Sakai.


 * Complete the &quot;Evaluating Articles and Sources&quot; training (linked below).
 * Open the &quot;Articles&quot; tab and pick one of the &quot;Available Articles&quot; or &quot;Assigned Articles&quot; to read and evaluate. As you read, answer the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):
 * First, identify which article you read. Then answer: Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Is there anything that you think should be added to the topic?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Check four citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? Does the source support the claims in the 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?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * 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 does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Optional: Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — ~.

Week 8
It's time to choose an article and assign it to yourself.


 * Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
 * Find an article from the list of &quot;Available Articles&quot; on the  Articles  tab on this course page. When you find the one you want to work on, click  Select to assign it to yourself. Up to five students may choose the same article.

See Sakai for extended instructions, including for students working on an article alone or as members of a group.

If you are working on the same article as other students, follow these best practices:


 * Determine the group member whose username is alphabetically first. This group member's Sandbox space is where you'll all share to draft your article. (It will be titled something like User:Diderot/sandbox .) Each person should link to that shared Sandbox from their own Sandbox page. A sandbox is like any other page on Wikipedia, and anyone can edit it.
 * Wikipedia doesn't handle multiple people editing from different devices at the same time very well. If you're working together in person, one person should add the work to the Sandbox. If you are all working independently, make small edits and save often to avoid &quot;editing conflicts&quot; with classmates. Make sure that you're logged in under your own Wikipedia account while editing in your classmate's sandbox to ensure your edits are recorded.
 * Don't create a group account for your project. Group accounts are prohibited.


 * 1) In your group sandbox (or individual sandbox, if you're working alone) write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected article. Be sure not to duplicate ideas someone else has already written.
 * 2) * Think back to when you did an article critique. What can you add? For the purposes of our course, think about whether you are more interested in the role of communicating to the public as a linguist or in acting as a forensic analyst.
 * 3) ** #*** If you're more interested in the role of communicating to the public, consider:
 * 4) **** Is the writing style accessible to a lay audience? Consider what you learned about linguistic complexity and comprehensibility from the jury instructions unit.
 * 5) **** Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * 6) **** How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * 7) **** Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * 8) *** If you're more interested in acting as a forensic analyst, consider:
 * 9) **** Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Is there evidence of plagiarism?
 * 10) ***** Take note of the writing style as you consider the potential for plagiarism. Do any sentences or phrases seem like they're not written in the Wikipedia &quot;voice&quot; or style?
 * 11) **** 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?
 * 12) ** Also, 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?
 * 13) Open up the Library's search page and compile a list of at least two relevant, reliable books, journal articles, or other sources that are not already included in your sandbox. Post that bibliography to the talk page of the article you'll be working on, and in your sandbox. Make sure to check in on the Talk page to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.

Week 9
You've picked a topic and found your sources. Now it's time to start writing.


 * Start to make progress on your plans written in Week 10 in your shared sandbox.
 * You may want to do additional research and writing to make further improvements to your article, based on my suggestions and your own plan.
 * If you plan to revise a paragraph, start working on those revisions.
 * If you plan to carefully check a paragraph for evidence of plagiarism, give some notes: what paragraph are you working on? Which sentences have you checked? How are you conducting your check? What have you found out?
 * If you're planning to add new content, starting writing some sentences. Explain in the shared sandbox where they will fit in the overall article.
 * Tip: The Citation Hunt tool shows unreferenced statements from articles. First, evaluate whether the statement in question is true! An uncited statement could just be lacking a reference or it could be inaccurate or misleading. Reliable sources on the subject will help you choose whether to add it or correct the statement.
 * Suggestion: Read Editing Wikipedia page 12-14.  See how to create links from your article to others, and from other articles to your own. Try to link to 3–5 articles, and link to your article from 2–3 other articles.

Keep reading your sources, too, as you work on your contributions.

Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9

Week 10
Check Sakai for a VoiceThread discussion on plagiarism and style. To relate this discussion to our course topics on authorship analysis, consider:


 * Have you recognized any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in your chosen article? Show the example, and tell us how you were able to spot it.
 * How is checking for authorship problems in a Wikipedia article different from analyzing authorship in other kinds of written texts, such as those we examined in class in Week 10?
 * What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism?
 * What kinds of linguistic features do you think characterize Wikipedia's style? How easy or difficult is it for you to adopt this style for this project?


 * If you'd like a Wikipedia Expert to review your draft, now is the time! Click the &quot;Get Help&quot; button in your shared sandbox to request notes.
 * Continue to expand and improve your work based on the feedback you've received from your instructor and/or the Wikipedia Expert, and format your article to match Wikipedia's tone and standards. Remember to contact your Wikipedia Expert at any time if you need further help!

Week 11
It's the final week to develop your article.


 * Read Editing Wikipedia page 15 to review a final check-list before completing your assignment.
 * Don't forget that you can ask for help from your Wikipedia Expert at any time!

Once you've made improvements to your article based on feedback, it's time to move your work to Wikipedia proper - the &quot;mainspace.&quot; At least one person working on your article should move finalized content from your group sandbox into the Wikipedia mainspace.

Editing an existing article


 * NEVER copy and paste your draft of an article over the entire article. Instead, edit small sections at a time.
 * Copy your edits into the article. Make many small edits, saving each time, and leaving an edit summary. Never replace more than one to two sentences without saving!
 * Be sure to copy text from your sandbox while the sandbox page is in 'Edit' mode. This ensures that the formatting is transferred correctly.

Week 12


Write a reflection (1–3 pages) on your Wikipedia contributions.



Respond to each of the following items as you reflect on your Wikipedia assignment. Subquestions are provided for each item as inspiration.




 * 1) Subject-matter content (1-2 paragraphs): How does the content of your article relate to our course or linguistics more generally? What did you learn from your article, either from the content that was already there or from what you added to the article? Is there anything more you wanted to learn about or add to your topic?
 * 2) Forensic linguistic perspective on critiquing and adding to articles (Choose at least two different bullet-pointed items; 2-3 paragraphs in total):
 * 3) * Authorship analysis involves examining a document for style and other evidence characteristic of a particular author. Wikipedia articles require a particular style, which may be quite different from the style you typically use. How would you describe the linguistic characteristics of this style, such as its syntax or lexical choices? As a contributor, did you find it difficult or easy to adopt this target style successfully? Why?
 * 4) * Taking the perspective of a Wikipedia editor -- or a forensic linguist - what challenges did you face in determining whether sentences written by other people were original or were &quot;too close&quot; (or plagiarized) from other sources?  If you were able to identify potential plagiarism or authorship problems, what kinds of evidence, or linguistic clues, helped you to identify these problems? If not, think back to the Plagiarism training that Wikipedia provided. Could you identify linguistic clues to authorship problems in the training exercises?
 * 5) * Reflecting on your experiences critiquing and contributing to articles, what insights do you gain into how successfully people can adopt other styles or voices (such as for criminal purposes like we examined in the course) or into how successfully forensic linguists can identify authorship?
 * 6) Public-facing side of linguistics and Wikipedia generally (1-2 paragraphs):  What did you learn from contributing to Wikipedia to bring knowledge of linguistics to the public? How was the experience of this project different from writing a standard research paper? How can Wikipedia be used to improve public understanding of linguistics, language and the law, or your topic specifically? Why is this important? What would you have changed about this assignment if you could?



Individually:


 * Submit your reflect to the Sakai assignment.
 * Format: please number your responses as shown above.
 * Length: Respond to each of the three items using the sub-questions to help guide your response. Minimum lengths are provided for each response, but you are free to write more if you choose. Respond to each of the three main questions.