Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/University of Washington/Meso and Microfluidics in Chemical Analysis (Spring)

‘Microfluidics’ refers to the manipulation of fluids in confined spaces, typically channels or networks of channels with at least one dimension on the micron scale. This course is interdisciplinary, drawing on analytical chemistry, biology, medicine, and engineering concepts.

--

Grading guidlines for Wikipedia assignment. (Note, this grading breakdown is also located at the bottom of the &quot;Timeline&quot; page, where deadlines and additional instructions are given.)

To receive full credit, complete the following:

Part I - Objectives graded as 'credit/no credit' (full credit awarded for completing the following):

 Practicing the basics &amp; Training modules (5%): complete all assigned training modules. The completion will be automatically tracked by Wikipedia, and will be time stamped. Students who receive a 7/7 will get full credit.  Critique an article (10%): create a section in your sandbox space clearly labeled as your &quot;Critique an article&quot; assignment. Include your full article critique.  Add to an article (10%): create a section in your sandbox space clearly labeled as your &quot;Add to an article&quot; assignment. Briefly summarize (bullet points are ok) your contributions.  Draft your article (10%): create a section in your sandbox space clearly labeled as your &quot;Article draft&quot; assignment. Draft your work there. If you move your work live to an existing page, you should follow the instructions provided and copy the HTLM text to the new location. If you start a new article, link to the new article in your sandbox space after you move your work live. Part II - Graded objectives (credit awarded based on completeness and quality):  Peer review and copy edit (10%): offer at least two of your classmates feedback on their drafts in the talk page associated with their sandbox. In your own sandbox, create a section titled &quot;My peer reviews&quot; - there, you should copy/paste the text you put in the talk pages (e.g., &quot;Review of Article Title X&quot; {copy/paste your review} and &quot;Review of Article Title Y&quot; {copy/paste your review}. You will also have an opportunity to summarize your reviews in your &quot;Reflective essay.&quot; CORRECTION: We did this via email so no need to put in your sandbox or &quot;Reflective essay&quot;.  Respond to your peer review (10%) &amp; Final article (30%): in your sandbox include a section entitled &quot;My Article Before Peer Review&quot; and another section entitled &quot;My Article After Peer Review&quot; (this is the final version of your article you will submit to Wikipedia for review). You will also have an opportunity to summarize how you responded to peer review and the main points of your article in your &quot;Reflective essay.&quot;  Reflective essay (10%): in your sandbox include a section entitled &quot;Reflective essay&quot; and follow the instructions on the Timeline page; please number the sections of the essay accordingly to make it easy for us to assign credit. What you write in your &quot;Reflective essay&quot; will also be used to help assign credit for the sections above.  In-class presentation (5%): information will be distributed in class.

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.

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 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.

This week, everyone should have a Wikipedia account.

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).
 * Choose an article - it can be on any topic (it doesn't have to be microfluidics related). Consider some 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?
 * Choose at least 2 questions relevant to the article you're evaluating. Leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:14, 7 July 2017 (UTC).

It's time to choose a topic and assign it to yourself.


 * Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
 * Find a topic from the list of &quot;Available Articles&quot; on the  Articles  tab on this course page. topics in the class googledoc spreadsheet:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NIOLewxkPfZP_F7ZpMeXrtfakQzF_9IZHqJGn_RMV5g/edit?usp=sharing.
 * When you find the one you want to work on, click  Select  add your name to assign it to yourself.
 * In your sandbox, write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected topic.
 * Think back to when you did an article critique. What can you add? Post some of your ideas to the article's talk page.   see below about googledoc instead of talk page
 * 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. Make sure to check in on the Talk page to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.
 * NOTE: After talking with some students, we feel it will be best to create three googledocs: &quot;Droplet-based microfluidics,&quot; &quot;Digital microfluidics,&quot; and &quot;Open microfluidics.&quot; Then people can use the googledocs for early discussions rather than the Talk page. We'll talk more about this in class on Friday.

''Note: These &quot;Discussion&quot; topics where created by Wikipedia and are useful for reflection so I've left them for your to think about on your own and feel free to bring up in class if you have questions. However, in general, we won't discuss in class unless someone brings it up.''

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;?

Week 3

 * 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
If applicable to your topic, review Wikipedia's rules for topics related to medicine, human health, and psychology.

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 your article, and cite that statement to a reliable source, as you learned in the online training. For example, you could cite the article you read for your Journal Review Assignment (see course syllabus). If you are not ready to post your 1-2 sentences live on Wikipedia (for example if you are creating a new article rather than editing an existing article, it would be strange to post 1-2 lone sentences), you can keep it on your sandbox for now.  (See training posted for next week on Sandboxes and Mainspace.)
 * 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 5
You've picked a topic and found your sources. Now it's time to start writing.

'''Creating a new article? '''


 * 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. A good example is Ada Lovelace. See Editing Wikipedia page 9 for more ideas.

'''Improving an existing article? '''


 * 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.

Keep reading your sources, too, as you prepare to 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?


 * Keep working on transforming your article into a complete first draft. Get draft ready for peer-review. All articles must be ready for peer review by Thursday at 5 pm.
 * If you'd like a Content Expert to review your draft, now is the time! Click the &quot;Get Help&quot; button in your sandbox to request notes.

Week 7

 * First, take the &quot;Peer Review&quot; online training.
 * We will assign pairings for peer review so that each person gets two peer reviews.
 * 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?
 * Peer reviews are due to your classmates by Wednesday at 5 pm to allow them time to incorporate your suggestions.

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

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 Content Expert if you have any questions.

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!

'''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.

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 2-3 articles, and link to your article from another article.

Week 8
Continue to expand and improve your work, and format your article to match Wikipedia's tone and standards. Remember to contact your Content Expert at any time if you need further help!

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 Content Expert at any time!

Please try to complete this by Friday 5/19. If needed, you can keep working on it until Monday 5/22 at 9:30 AM = hard deadline.


 * Write a reflective summary (&lt;1.5 pages) on your Wikipedia contributions. Your concise summary here will also help us assign points for the &quot;Final article&quot; and &quot;Peer review&quot; portions of your grade. Please answer the following questions (numbering them as below):


 * 1) What article did you work on? Was this a new article or an existing article?
 * 2) Summarize your main contributions in 3-4 sentences or bullet points.
 * 3) How did you respond to suggestions from peer reviewers? Please list specific changes in 3-5 sentences or bullet points. Also indicate if you used the Wikipedia content expert or received feedback from other Wikipedians outside the course.
 * 4) Reflect on the following questions in a short paragraph: Was this assignment valuable to your learning (of course material, research/literature review skills, ability to critically evaluate peers, etc.) - why or why not? Do you think your article will be valuable to Wikipedia readers? How could this assignment be improved in the future? [You will not lose points for negative comments; please be honest in your critiques of this assignment to improve the course for future years. Note: Tianzi will record points for this (not me) to help you feel like you can be more open.]

Please try to complete this by Friday 5/19. If needed, you can keep working on it until Monday 5/22 at 9:30 AM = hard deadline.

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

Week 9

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

Week 10

 * Present about your Wikipedia editing experience.