Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Western Carolina University/Gender in Politics (Fall 2016)

This course comparatively examines gender inequality in the 21st century. Many of the issues that were once solely discussed and solved at the nation-state level are now being treated as issues to be reckoned with at the international level. The topics we will cover will not only examine the role of women in politics but will extend to what is “political” about being a woman or a man in our modern society. We will look at gender equality issues such as access to health care and education, equal employment, sexual violence and war and physical autonomy across different national and regional settings to depict the commonalities and differences that exist in the global world today. Furthermore, this course will look at the effect of forces such as global economy on gender equality and the role that it may play in altering the way men and women access the job market and economic resources. Lastly, this course will concentrate on the role of Intergovernmental Organizations such as the United Nations and the European Union in setting global norms and requirements for equality. We will debate the capability of international law to address gender inequality and what the prospects may be for the future of global justice.

The course is designed to help you achieve the following objectives:

•Facts: To acquire some additional facts about the state of gender equality in the global world. •Concepts: To understand the basic concepts that scholars use to study gender from an international perspective. •Application: To be able to apply the concepts you learn in class to understand what is happening in the world. •Writing: To write well. This includes both a clear, engaging writing style and organization that gets to the point without losing content. •Expression: To express yourself well in front of others. This includes the ability to engage in meaningful discussion and to make clear, intelligent statements to groups. •Collaboration: To think and work with others. This means using the full potential of various kinds of in-person and electronic conversations to learn more than you could on your own. •Learning how to conduct research: This includes an ability to research a topic and find out what you need to know from all available sources, direct or indirect, printed or electronic.

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! These trainings are required for your course.
 * 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 5
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, and 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) 15:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC).
 * Come to class prepared to give a very short presentation – 1 minute long – on:
 * Why that article is problematic?
 * Which sources might you use to solve some of the problems?
 * What you will do to make the article better. Will you correct content? Add content? Insert &quot;citation needed&quot; tags? All of the above?

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 6
You should add a small contribution to an article related to your class, or add a citation to a claim that doesn't have one.


 * Complete the &quot;Sources and Citations&quot; training (linked below).
 * The Citation Hunt tool can show you some statements that don't have citations. You can use that to find an article to reference.
 * When you make a small claim, clearly state the fact in your own words, and then cite the source where you found the information.


 * 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 7

 * Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
 * Choose 3–5 potential articles that you can tackle, and post links to them on your Wikipedia user page. For articles that already exist, check the Talk page to see what other Wikipedians might be doing. Finally, present your choices to your instructor for feedback.

Week 8

 * On the Students tab, assign your chosen topic to yourself.
 * 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.

Week 9
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.

Basic Requirements


 * Your article should contain at least 4 sections
 * You article should have at least 5 sources
 * Your article should contain an info box when appropriate
 * Your article may contain pictures if needed

Keep reading your sources, too, as you prepare to write the body of the article.

Resources: Editing Wikipedia pages 7–9


 * 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.
 * 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.

Everyone has begun writing their article drafts.

Week 10

 * First, take the &quot;Peer Review&quot; online training.
 * Select one 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,  pay attention to the following questions:
 * Is the article suitable for the first-time/ general readers?
 * How well does the article cover the topic?
 * How reliable are the references?
 * How well written is the article?

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

Week 11
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 12
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.

Week 13
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.

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!

Week 14
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!
 * Your final article will be graded based on the following criteria:
 * Vision for the entry content: Did you divide up the material in a way that reflects both the literature and neutral point of view? Did you use appropriate heading?
 * Your research in thinking-beyond-Google to find relevant and diverse sources.
 * Your organization of the entry and the content: Did you organize the material or are there things in one section that belong elsewhere? Did you provide relevant material? Are there things missing?
 * Your writing of a well-supported, well-researched entry: Neutral point of view; Sources/footnotes; Grammatically correct; Paragraphs well-constructed.

Write a 2-3 page reflection paper. Some questions to think about:
 * What did you learn from this project?
 * What surprised you about this project?
 * Did your Wikipedia submission differ from your initial plans? Why?
 * Did other Wikipedia users edit your submission? Did you agree with those edits? Were you happy or upset at those edits?
 * If you had to give advice to someone about to take this class, what tips would you give them about the Wikipedia assignment?

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