Monday, September 14, 2009

Looking Inside Wikipedia

For your upcoming Wikipedia project you will be expected to write a short paper on the history of a Wikipedia entry. This will require you to look at the page's history and discussion pages (in particular the latter). To give you an idea of how public figures and major issues are contested, we will look at a few examples in class:
As we consider these entries, we should also keep in mind the "five pillars" that guide the editorial policy of Wikipedia.

See also the example mentioned by Dave Parry, comparing the entry on global warming to the article on the controversies about it.

NOTE: For today's in-class writing assignment, you should have brought a copy of one of the articles by Parry, Cummings, or Cohen with you to class. If you did not, please borrow (and return) a copy from me. In your writing, you should address the following concerns, preferably in paragraph form and using supporting details from the text.
  1. First, decide whether the article is making an argument or presenting an objective perspective on Wikipedia. If it's making an argument, identify as precisely as you can the argument you think it's making. Do you agree or disagree? Why? If the article is objective, what is the controversy that is being presented? Which side--banning Wikipedia or teaching it--do you find more convincing?
  2. What evidence from the article is most (or least) convincing? Paraphrase or describe the key examples and explain why you think they are effective (or ineffective)?
  3. What are your preconceptions about Wikipedia? What have past teachers said about it? Do these arguments match what you've heard? Do you think Wikipedia should be used in academic research? Why or why not?
  4. Several of the authors talk about issues like "information literacy." What do you think is meant by this term? Why might students need to develop it?

No comments:

Post a Comment