We have, over the course of this semester, learned a little about how Wikipedia works through trainings on our Wikipedia course page. As we have discussed, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Encyclopedias do not present original research. Instead, encyclopedias summarize existing research. This is why they are sometimes called tertiary sources (as opposed to primary or secondary sources).
We have also already seen that Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that can be edited by anyone. This can make the articles on Wikipedia better, but it can also make the articles worse than more traditionally published encyclopedias [annotate with thoughts on how articles might be better or worse than traditional encyclopedias]. For this reason, a person looking for reliable source material on a subject should always read the sources cited in a Wikipedia article and decide if those sources are reliable.
Though an encyclopedia is meant to provide an objective summary of existing research, there are many arguments/claims that are involved in creating an article. A review of talk pages on articles about controversial topics will reveal that editors often make arguments to support a decision to organize an article in a particular way or include certain information.
Your goal with this final assignment is to find an article that needs significant work and make it better. The best way to do this is use Wikipedia’s article finder tool to find an article related to your research project. Because you have already found and read reliable sources while working on this project, you have knowledge that you can use to improve an article. As you have already learned, it will be best if you select a Wikipedia article that needs improvement.
I am sure many of you will wonder how much you need to do on this assignment. This will differ depending on the article you decide to improve. It may be that you focus your energy on improving one thing (like citations) in an entire article, or it might be that you focus on making one section as strong as possible. Based on what you set out to accomplish, I will evaluate that piece of the article according to the standards laid out in Wikipedia trainings (the “evaluating articles and sources” training).
After you have finished work on your article, you will write a 500-word reflection considering your experiences as a Wikipedia editor in relation to your experience developing argument-based academic essays this semester.
You will have many opportunities to get my feedback as you work on this project–please take advantage of this. Ask questions in class and make an appointment with me if you’d like. You can also write me an email to ask me to review what you have in your sandbox before you make changes to an actual Wikipedia article (I will read and bold/highlight things that need revision).
Template for Final Wikipedia Description and Reflection
(create a Word document and upload to Canvas)
Edits
My Wikipedia username is: ___________________
Summary of Work Done [quickly describe what your goals were and what exactly you changed in the article]
Reflection (complete this after you’ve completed your contributions)
Reflection on the experience of improving a Wikipedia article. You might focus specifically on the difference between the requirements for articles on Wikipedia and the requirements for argument-based academic writing, but you can take a different approach if you would like. Approximately 500 words.
