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

‘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.

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 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 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 related to the course or another topic in science (your choice!) 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 on Wikipedia related to your course or another topic in science of your choice to read and evaluate. As you read, 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?
 * Create a section in your sandbox titled &quot;Article evaluation&quot; where you'll leave notes about your observations and learnings. Indicate the article title, and give a link to the article. Write a paragraph (~5 sentences), titled &quot;Reflection paragraph&quot; where you summarize your thoughts in response to the questions above (or other thoughts as you evaluate the article).
 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Copy/paste this text in your sandbox in a section titled &quot;Text I posed to the article's talk page.&quot; Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 14:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC).

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; in the class googledoc spreadsheet (as I described in class). Note, we will not be using the Articles tab on this Wikipedia course page; we will use our own googledoc instead. When you find the one you want to work on, add your name to the googledoc spreadsheet.
 * In your sandbox, create a section called &quot;Initial planning for my article,&quot; and write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected article.
 * Think back to when you did an article critique. What can you add? Post some of your ideas to the article's 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. Check in with your other classmates and get their advice on your sources.


 * Note: we will have an in class session on this on 1/12, so it is important to choose your article and begin initial planning prior to the in class session. Once you have met with your classmates, you can revise what you have noted in your initial planning.


 * Note for graduate students: please remember to discuss with me your role as either an &quot;article consolidator&quot; or &quot;editing an article from last year's class&quot; -- we will discuss all together on 1/12.

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.


 * Making a figure is an important part of scientific writing and is also of significant value to Wikipedia readers. The in class session on 1/12 is a great time to discuss with your classmates figures that are &quot;missing&quot; from current articles or would be useful to add to a new article; you can also consider this as the quarter progresses as well. If you decide to create a figure, please talk with me (Ashleigh) regarding your plan, and we can likely reduce the amount of text you will contribute to compensate for time in figure preparation.

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
Familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding a citation to the article you critiqued in the &quot;Article evaluation&quot; assignment. 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.

Make a section in your sandbox entitled &quot;Add to an article&quot; and copy/paste here the sentences you added/edited and the reference you added.

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

Although many of you will not be writing about medical topics, others in the class will be, and you may serve as their peer reviewer. It is important that everyone completes this training.

Week 4
Read any that apply to your chosen topic. Also, when peer reviewing your classmates' work later in the course, please read any that apply to their topics.

[https://wikiedu.org/biographies Biographies

]

[https://wikiedu.org/chemistry Chemistry

]

[https://wikiedu.org/medicine Medicine

]

You've picked a topic and found your sources. Now it's time to start writing. Create a section in your sandbox entitled &quot;Initial drafting of my article,&quot; and work on the following:

'''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

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.

Everyone has begun writing their article drafts.

Week 5

 * 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?


 * This is a very important topic. We have covered some of this in class on the first day (see syllabus). Now is a good time to reflect and ask any additional questions you have in class.

Continue drafting your Wikipedia article. Look ahead to Week 6 on the timeline (below) for instructions on how/when to submit to your peer reviewers.

Week 6

 * Keep working on transforming your article into a complete first draft. Get draft ready for peer-review.
 * Email your article as a word document to your two peer reviewers (Dostie and I will assign pairings) by 5 pm on 2/8. Please cc Dostie and me on your email.
 * Copy/paste article in your sandbox in a section entitled, &quot;Article I emailed for peer review.&quot;
 * 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.


 * 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?
 * 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.

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


 * 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
It's time to work with your feedback from your peer reviewers to improve your article!


 * Read Editing Wikipedia pages 12 and 14.
 * Important: 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.
 * 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.
 * Create a new section in your sandbox entitled &quot;Revised article after peer review,&quot; and begin revising your article there.
 * Read Editing Wikipedia page 15 to review a final check-list before completing your assignment.
 * Your final version of your article should in included in your sandbox in the section entitled &quot;Revised article after peer review.&quot; (You will turn in your work by printing out your Sandbox and turning it in to Dostie's mailbox by 4:30 PM on 2/26; please also include your reflective essay in your sandbox too before you print it out (see note in the block below for instructions). Also, please email the graduate student &quot;article consolidator&quot; who is leading your topic to let him/her know that your article is finalized so that he/she will know it is time to look for it in your sandbox in the &quot;Revised article after peer review&quot; section.

Write a &quot;reflective essay&quot; (&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 create a section in your sandbox entitled &quot;Reflective essay,&quot; and 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.]


 * Prepare for an in-class presentation about your Wikipedia editing experience. (Instructions will be given in class.)

Week 9
Graduate students have an additional assignment acting as either an &quot;article consolidator&quot; or &quot;editing an article from last year's class&quot;. The roles were decided in the initial planning meeting on 1/12. Students who are &quot;editing an article from last year's class&quot; should have already discussed this with me (if you have questions now, please ask!).

Instructions for graduate student &quot;article consolidators&quot;: Most of the topics involve integrating work from multiple students prior to posting to Wikipedia. All students should email their &quot;article consolidator&quot; to let him/her know that the final version of the student's article is available in his/her sandbox in the &quot;Revised article after peer review section;&quot; this should be completed by 2/26 at 4:30 PM. (Graduate student article consolidators: if you are missing work from a student, please email Dostie and me by the morning of 2/27, and we will help you handle the situation). Carefully read work from all students contributing to your topic area; revise any sections as needed and integrate sections together into a single well-written article. If any sections are not well-researched or if you doubt the accuracy, please delete those sections (you can confer with the article writer about this too). Send a group email to all students whose work you edited/consolidated attaching the final edited version that you will post on Wikipedia (copy/paste into a Word document and send as an email attachment) and cc Dostie and me on the email; please send the email by 3/8. Once this is done, it's time to move your work to Wikipedia proper - the &quot;mainspace.&quot; To do this, please follow the instructions below. This should be completed by the last day of instruction 3/9 (but you may have an extension until the following Monday 3/12 if needed); please email Dostie and me to let me know when this is completed.

'''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.

Week 10
Present about your Wikipedia editing experience (following the instructions given in class).

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

Below is the grading breakdown:

- Complete all training modules: 5%

- Article evaluation &amp; Add to an article: 5%

- Initial planning for &amp; Initial drafting of my article: 5%

- Article I emailed for peer review: 10%

- Peer reviews of your classmates' work: 10%

- Revised article after peer review: 50%

- Reflective essay: 10%

- In class presentation: 5%