Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/University of Chicago/Violence in the Early Years PBPL 27809 (Winter)

This course will address issues related to children's exposure to violence. Classes will cover topics including, but not limited to, the history of violence against children, violence in the home, impacts on biology, interpersonal violence, sexual abuse, children's literature, school-related violence, structural violence, and other issues related to violence in children's lives. We will analyze policies and reforms, review relevant research on each topic, and examine implications of the findings to policy and practice.

Week 1
Welcome to your Wikipedia project's course timeline. This page will guide you through the Wikipedia project for your course.

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.


 * Create an account and join this course page.
 * It's time to dive into Wikipedia. Complete the introductory training modules.  During these trainings, you will make edits in a sandbox and learn the basic rules of Wikipedia.  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.
 * Please review the following handouts:


 * 1) Editing Wikipedia pages 1–5
 * 2) Evaluating Wikipedia


 * Create a User page.
 * To practice editing and communicating on Wikipedia, introduce yourself to a classmate on their user talk page.
 * Finally, we introduce Intertwine, a video conferencing tool where you can will create your own User page and User Talk Page with peer editors enrolled in other courses. Sign up for a sessionhere or using the Intertwine training module below.

NOTE: Intertwine is completely optional.


 * Explore topics related to your areas of interest to get a feel for how Wikipedia is organized.  What areas seem to be missing or incomplete?  As you explore, make a note of articles that seem like good candidates for improvement.  You will soon need to suggest possible term projects to work on, so this is a chance to look around informally.
 * Look around Wikipedia in the topic area of the course. Don't just look at main pages, but also at smaller and more specialized sub-pages and specialized articles. Are major academic theories or ideas weakly covered? Are there major books with no summary (or a poor one)? Do articles use and reference modern social science?

This week, everyone should have a Wikipedia account.


 * Understanding Wikipedia as a community, consider its expectations and etiquette.
 * Basics of editing
 * Anatomy of Wikipedia articles, what makes a good article, how to distinguish between good and bad articles
 * Collaborating and engaging with the Wiki editing community
 * Tips on finding the best articles to work on for class assignments

Handouts:

Week 2

 * Choose one article, identify ways in which you can improve and correct its language and grammar, and make the appropriate changes. You can also highlight statements in need of citation, or more reliable sourcing. Note: You do not need to alter the article's substantive content or add sources; we will be doing this in a separate assignment. For now, just copyedit.

It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles.


 * You may want to review the &quot;Evaluating Articles and Sources&quot; training (linked above under &quot;Week 2&quot;).
 * Choose an article related to the course.  As you read it, consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):
 * 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?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? 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 is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * 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 — Jami (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:05, 28 March 2018 (UTC).

Now that you're thinking about what makes a &quot;good&quot; Wikipedia article, consider some additional questions.


 * Wikipedians often talk about &quot;content gaps.&quot; What do you think a content gap is, and what are some possible ways to identify them?
 * What are some reasons a content gap might arise? What are some ways to remedy them?
 * Does it matter who writes Wikipedia?
 * What does it mean to be &quot;unbiased&quot; on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of &quot;bias&quot;?

Be prepared to discuss in class some of your observations about Wikipedia articles in your topic area that are missing or could use improvement.


 * Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
 * Team up with classmates with similar interests with whom you will work on the final project together.
 * Research 3–5 Wikipedia articles that you will consider working on as your main project. Review the content of the articles and check the Talk pages to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Identify one or two areas from each that you could improve.
 * For each proposed topic, describe your group's plans.  If you are starting a new article, write a summary version of your article with citations (3-4 paragraphs) in your Wikipedia sandbox. If you are improving an existing article, create a detailed outline reflecting your proposed changes, and post this for community feedback, along with a brief description of your plans, on the article’s talk page, in addition to your group's sandbox. Make sure to check back on the talk page often and engage with any responses.
 * Discuss these proposed topics with your instructor to decide the final topic.

Notes about working in groups:


 * Select one group member whose Sandbox space you'll all share. (It will be titled something like User:Diderot/sandbox.) Each person should link to that shared Sandbox from their own Sandbox page.  You can consider this to be your group's Sandbox for the purposes of the project. 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.

Week 3
Familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding to an article:


 * Choose a source (one of the short readings from this week, a previous week, a future week, or one that you know from another course).
 * Choose a Wikipedia article related to the class, where an insight from this source is relevant. Ideally this is an article where the substantive point is not already made, and it is in need of content and sourcing.
 * Add the new information to the Wikipedia article, backed up with a citation to your source. It could be as little as a sentence, though, as Wikipedia advises, feel free to &quot;be bold.&quot;

Note: The Citation Hunt tool shows unreferenced statements from articles. If you decide to use this, you must 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.

OPTIONAL: Again, we introduce Intertwine,  a video conferencing tool where you will do an hour-long edit-a-thon to improve a fun Wikipedia article with peer editors enrolled in other courses. Sign up for a session here using the Intertwine training module below.


 * Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why?
 * What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company?
 * What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism?
 * What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism?

Week 4
Review Wikipedia's rules for topics related to medicine, human health, and psychology.

Week 5

 * By now, you should have your final Wikipedia article chosen.  On the Students tab, assign your Wikipedia article to yourself (make sure everyone in your group is assigned to that article on the Students tab of this course page).
 * Remove the rest of the articles from your user page and add your topic/article on the course page.
 * In the article's talk page and your sandbox, update your plan to contribute to the selected article.
 * Think back to when you did an article critique. What can you add?
 * When adding to the talk page, make sure you use the appropriate formatting, sign your suggestions, use the : for replies, etc.
 * The style of talk pages is not to add one big heading with all of your proposed changes but rather to break it up by theme or major type of proposal.  You will probably add many headings with comments, each related to a different aspect or part of the article.
 * Because you are collaborating with others in the class, you will sometimes be adding to the same subsections on the talk page (rather than creating duplicate ones).  You can put your discussion in replies to one another.
 * Spend some time looking around Wikipedia for articles related to your topic, whether they are broader or have parallels.  How is the information organized?  How should your article fit in?  Are you sure you are editing in the right place or addressing the topic in the right way?
 * Compile a bibliography of relevant, reliable sources and post it to the talk page of the article you are working on. Begin reading the sources. Make sure to check in on the talk page (or watchlist) to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.

Books

Films

History

Linguistics

Political Science

Psychology

Sociology

Women's Studies

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

Creating a new article?


 * It can be helpful to write an outline of that topic in the form of a standard Wikipedia article's &quot;lead section.&quot; Write it in your sandbox.
 * A &quot;lead&quot; section is not a traditional introduction. It should summarize, very briefly, what the rest of the article will say in detail. The first paragraph should include important, broad facts about the subject. One example is Ada Lovelace. See Editing Wikipedia page 9 for more ideas.

Improving an existing article?


 * It can be helpful to identify what's missing from the current form of the article. Think back to the skills you learned while critiquing an article. Make notes for improvement in your sandbox.

Complete a first draft for peer review


 * Keep working on transforming your article into a complete first draft.  You will need to have a first draft ready for peer review.
 * If you'd like a Wikipedia Expert to review your draft, now is the time! Click the &quot;Get Help&quot; button in your sandbox to request notes.
 * Keep reading your sources, too, as you write the body of the article.

Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9

Everyone has begun writing their article drafts.

Week 6

 * What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of &quot;neutrality&quot;?
 * What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information?
 * On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?
 * If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?

Week 7

 * First, take the &quot;Peer Review&quot; online training.
 * Select two classmates’ articles that you will peer review and copyedit. On the Articles tab, find the articles that you want to review, and then assign them to yourself in the Review column.
 * Peer review your classmates' drafts. Leave suggestions on on the Talk page of the article, or sandbox, that your fellow student is working on. Other editors may be reviewing your work, so look for their comments! Be sure to acknowledge feedback from other Wikipedians.
 * As you review, make spelling, grammar, and other adjustments. Pay attention to the tone of the article. Is it encyclopedic?
 * OPTIONAL: Not only your classmates, but also a broader group of Wikipedia student editors can benefit from peer review! Here, we introduce Intertwine one more time. You will do an hour-long peer review session with peers from other courses. Sign up for a sessionhere using the Intertwine training module below.

Once you've made improvements to your article based on peer review feedback, it's time to move your work to Wikipedia proper - the &quot;mainspace.&quot;

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.

Creating a new article?


 * Read Editing Wikipedia page 13, and follow those steps to move your article from your Sandbox to Mainspace.
 * You can also review the Sandboxes and Mainspace online training.

Did your contribution disappear?


 * A general reminder: Don't panic if your contribution disappears, and don't try to force it back in.
 * Check to see if there is an explanation of the edit on the article's talk page. If not, (politely) ask why it was removed.  As Wikipedia says, &quot;assume good faith for the intentions of others.&quot;
 * Contact your instructor or Wikipedia Content Expert and let them know.

Handout:


 * Optional: For new articles or qualifying expansions of stubs, compose a one-sentence “hook,” nominate it for “Did you know,” (see the DYK instructions handout) and monitor the nomination for any issues identified by other editors. Wiki Education staff can provide support for this process.

-

Handout:

Week 8
Every student has finished reviewing their assigned articles, making sure that every article has been reviewed.

You now have some feedback from other students and possibly other Wikipedians. It's time to work with that feedback to improve your article!


 * Read Editing Wikipedia pages 12 and 14.
 * Return to your draft or article and think about the suggestions. Decide which ones to start implementing. Reach out to your instructor, your Wikipedia Expert, and/or your classmates if you have any questions.
 * Do additional research and writing to make further improvements to your article, based on suggestions and your own critique.
 * If you decide to add an image to your article, note Wikipedia's strict rules about what media can be added.  Before you upload an image, take the Contributing Images and Media Files training.

Continue to expand and improve your work, 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!

Reflect on your Wikipedia editing experience. Consider the following questions:


 * 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: Summarize your edits and why you felt they were a valuable addition to the article. How does your article compare to earlier versions?
 * Peer Review: Consider the peer review process. What did you contribute in your review of your peers article? What did your peers recommend you change on your article?  How did it affect your learning and your final product?
 * 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?

Week 9
In this presentation, each group will present original thoughts, critiques, ideas, and policy/practical responses on their chosen topic that are not appropriate for the Wikipedia article. This may also include background information included in the Wikipedia article in order to familiarize your classmates with the topic. This is an opportunity to engage critically with your chosen topic.

Complete your final 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!

Everyone should have finished all of the work they'll do on Wikipedia, and be ready for grading.