Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/University of Washington/Physiology of Plant Behavior (Spring 2017)

Description The Wikipedia project will be assigned and monitored through the course WikiEdu site. Several scaffold assignments will result in a new page uploaded to Wikipedia or an addition to an existing Wikipedia article. A small amount of time will be spent in class to develop topics, but research will occur primarily outside of class.

Grading The Wikipedia Project will be worth 100 total points   Student Training: create your accounts &amp; take all assigned trainings throughout the term. Worth 10 points. Account creation must be done by Wednesday, 4/12 

 Wikipedia evaluation: turn in as a section in your sandbox space titled &quot;Article evaluation&quot; with notes. Worth 10 points. Due Sunday, 4/16 

 Ideas Draft: due as a section in your sandbox space titled &quot;idea draft&quot; with notes about how you would improve at least 2 articles. Worth 10 points. Due Sunday, 4/23 

 First Draft: due as a completed draft in your sandbox space titled &quot;article draft&quot;. Worth 20 points. Due Sunday, 5/7 

 Peer Review: in order to get credit you must comment on two of your peers sandbox talk pages with notes about their drafts. The Wiki Ed Dashboard will track your edits and summarize them on the Students tab of this course page. Worth 10 points. Due Sunday, 5/21 

 Article Online: you should move your work live and begin updating and perfecting your article in the &quot;mainspace&quot;. Worth 20 points. Due Monday, 5/29 

 Presentation: in class presentation. Please use the guidelines on presentation module on the &quot;Timeline&quot; tab for help. Worth 20 points. Last week 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

Due Wednesday, April 12th.


 * 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
Due Monday, April 17th. It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles. You'll evaluate two Wikipedia articles related to the course and leave suggestions for improving them on the article Talk pages.


 * Complete the &quot;Evaluating Articles and Sources&quot; training (linked below).
 * Review the following articles on Wikipedia
 * Botany
 * Plant physiology
 * Create a section in your sandbox titled &quot;Article evaluation&quot; where you'll leave notes about your observations and learnings.
 * 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?
 * 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 — Jmmcabee (talk) 17:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC).

Now that you're thinking about what makes a &quot;good&quot; Wikipedia article, we'll 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;?
 * We'll also spend some time looking up articles in our field on Wikipedia to help as you finalize your possible topics.

Week 3
Due Sunday, 4/24


 * Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
 * Look up 3-5 potential topics related to the course that you might want to update on Wikipedia. Review the content of the article and check the Talk page to see what other Wikipedians are already contributing. Identify one or two areas from each that you could improve.
 * If you need some help finding ideas, consider browsing Category:Botany stubs or review the list of &quot;available articles&quot; on the Articles tab above.
 * Choose 2-3 potential articles from that list that you can tackle, and post links to the articles and your notes about what you might improve in your sandbox.
 * As editing practice, pick two of your possible topics and copyedit them or add 1-2 new sentences of content and cite that statement to a reliable source, as you learned in the online training.
 * Finally, present your &quot;idea draft&quot; with your choices to your instructor for feedback.


 * 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

 * Once your topic is finalized, on the Students tab, assign your chosen topic to yourself (if you've chosen a topic from the list of &quot;available articles&quot; you can just assign it to yourself from the Articles tab.)
 * In your sandbox, 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, too.
 * 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.
 * Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9
 * Your first draft is due Sunday, 5/7. 

Everyone has begun writing their article drafts.

Week 5
This week you will continue drafting your article. By the end of the week it should be ready for peer review.

'''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.

Hint: 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.


 * 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 6
Your peer review notes are due Sunday, 5/21 by 10pm.


 * 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?

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

Week 7
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.

Week 8
Due Monday, 5/29 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' or 'Edit source' 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.

Once your work is live

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.
 * Remember to contact your Content Expert at any time if you need further help!

Week 9
Reflect on your Wikipedia editing experience. You may use the following prompts to craft your reflection. The reflection should be written into your sandbox.


 * 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?

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