Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/University of New Hampshire/Human Dev and Learning (Spring 2018)

This advanced undergraduate and graduate course covers traditional topics in human development, developmental psychology, and the learning sciences (e.g., motivation, socialization, learning, cognition, intelligence, etc.) from a cultural perspective.

Week 8
Welcome to the Wikipedia project's course timeline. This page will guide you through the Wikipedia project, including 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. Below, you'll find the first set of required online trainings. New modules will appear on this timeline as you get to new milestones. Be sure to check back and complete them!

Prior to class on Tuesday 3/20, each student should have a Wikipedia account and have completed the &quot;Wikipedia Essentials&quot; and &quot;Editing Basics&quot; training modules.

Week 9
It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles.


 * 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?

Let's evaluate a Wikipedia article related to the course.


 * Complete the &quot;Evaluating Articles and Sources&quot; training (linked below).
 * Read and evaluate an article on Wikipedia, considering the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Did anything distract you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular cultural position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are over- 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? What could be added that's missing?
 * 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 similar ideas in class?

In addition to attributes that make for a &quot;good&quot; Wikipedia article, consider some questions that are central to the work that we'll do in this class to contribute to Wikipedia:


 * Wikipedians often talk about &quot;content gaps.&quot; What we're focused on in this class is what might be called a &quot;culture gap.&quot; It's a type of content gap, where the perspective of a single cultural community has been represented as being generally true or applying to everyone. It's a problem because these gaps are usually based in over-generalized science, and implicitly carry a non-neutral point of view. What are some possible ways to identify a &quot;culture gap&quot;?
 * What are some reasons a culture 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;?

Effectively editing Wikipedia requires learning about how sources are used and how plagiarism is handled. In addition to completing the training modules below, consider:


 * 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?

Once the above is complete, go further to familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding a citation to an article. There are two ways you can do this:


 * Add 1-2 sentences to a course-related article, and cite that statement to a reliable source, as you learned in the online training.
 * 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.

Week 10

 * Once your group has a Wikipedia article to work on, make sure everyone in the group is assigned to that article on the Students tab of this course page.
 * Select one group member whose Sandbox space 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.

Review Wikipedia's rules for topics related to medicine, human health, and psychology. This won't apply to everyone's projects, but some pages addressing topics, in child development especially, may benefit from this training.

Here are additional guidelines for contributing to certain topics:

Psychology

Sociology

Women's Studies


 * Compile a list of relevant, reliable books, journal articles, or other sources. Post that bibliography to the talk page of the article you'll be working on, and in your sandbox, and add to it as you find more high-quality sources. Make sure to check in on the Talk page to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.

It's time to choose a Wikipedia article or two for your group and post your group's initial plan (i.e., prospectus) for how you'll contribute to the article(s).


 * Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
 * Using ideas we've discussed in the course as a guide, browse for 1-2 Wikipedia articles to which you could make a substantial contribution. Think back to when you did a Wikipedia article critique. What can you add or revise to improve the article? Think beyond just adding text and sources. For example, would the article benefit from organizational improvements?
 * When your group finds 1-2 Wikipedia articles to work on, include the exact titles of them in the prospectus (see below).

Post a &quot;prospectus,&quot; a tentative written plan for your group's contribution. The prospectus must be approved in order for you to proceed, and includes several components. In your sandbox (or the one your group has designated to post the prospectus):


 * Write a couple of paragraphs about what you plan to contribute to the selected article(s). Include the exact Wikipedia article titles.
 * Explain how the topic/article related to a main idea of the course? What's the &quot;culture gap&quot; you've identified, and how do you plan to address it?
 * What are a few key secondary sources that you've identified so far?

One of your group members should have posted your group's &quot;prospectus,&quot; or your tentative plan for contributing to Wikipedia. Dr. Coppens will review this and give you:


 * a green light to proceed;
 * a yellow light with concerns that need to be addressed; or
 * a red light that indicates a significant problem

If you do not have a green light, start working with Dr. Coppens right away to address the issues so that your group can get started.

Once you have a green light, Dr. Coppens will add your Wikipedia article(s) to this course page. From there, it can be officially selected by your group.

Week 11
You've picked a topic, Wikipedia article(s), and found some initial sources. You've also had your prospectus approved. Now it's time to start writing and organizing.


 * You've identified what's missing from the current form of the article, most notably the &quot;culture gap.&quot; Start chipping away on filling in this information in a way that makes teh article accessible and easy to understand. Think back to the skills you learned while critiquing an article. Make notes for improvement in your sandbox.
 * Keep reading your sources, too, as you write the text of the Wikipedia article revisions. New sources will reveal new aspects to write about and include, especially examples and evidence.

Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9

Everyone has begun writing their article or revision drafts.

Week 12

 * Keep working on developing your article revisions.

This is an individual assignment. When everyone's peer review is complete, each Wikipedia group will have received multiple peer reviews on the writing and revisions they have drafted so far.


 * First, take the &quot;Peer Review&quot; online training.
 * Select another group's article revisions that you will peer review and copyedit. On the Articles tab, find the article that you want to review. Then in the &quot;My Articles&quot; section of the Home tab, assign it to yourself to review.
 * Peer review your classmate's draft. Leave suggestions 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?

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

Week 13
You probably 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 or your Wikipedia Expert if you have any questions.


 * Keep working on transforming your article revision, building on the first draft and the peer review.
 * Don't get stuck on your initial versions! Add whole new sections, new secondary sources and evidence, reorganize, etc.
 * 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.

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;


 * 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 14
Do additional research and writing to make further improvements to your article, based on suggestions and your own critique.


 * Read Editing Wikipedia page 12 to 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.
 * Consider adding an image to your article. Wikipedia has strict rules about what media can be added, so make sure to take Contributing Images and Media Files training before you upload an image.


 * Prepare for an in-class presentation about your Wikipedia editing experience.

Present about your Wikipedia editing experience. 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?
 * Peer Review: If your class did peer review, include information about 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?
 * 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 15
Present about your Wikipedia editing experience. 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?
 * Peer Review: If your class did peer review, include information about 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?
 * 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 16
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!

By May 10, 2018 everyone should have finished all of the work they'll do on Wikipedia, and be ready for the project to be evaluated.