Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/UBC/ANTH 473 FNEL 480 C Endangered Languages and Language Revitalization (Fall 2017)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This Course Wikipedia Resources Connect
Questions? Ask us:

contact@wikiedu.org

Course name
ANTH 473 FNEL 480 C Endangered Languages and Language Revitalization
Institution
UBC
Instructor
Christine Schreyer
Wikipedia Expert
Shalor (Wiki Ed)
Subject
Anthropology
Course dates
2017-10-16 00:00:00 UTC – 2017-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
Approximate number of student editors
30


Local and global factors affecting language loss and endangerment. Practical strategies for sustaining and reviving languages are also discussed. Critical study of the historical, social, cultural, political, and economic factors impacting on language loss, retention, and revival. Research on and application of methodologies for collaborative, trans-disciplinary, community-based documentation and revitalization of BC's Indigenous linguistic heritage.

Student Assigned Reviewing
Maddibutterfield Kwak'wala language
Palaeogal Master-Apprentice Language Learning Program
Thegirlbeneaththemoon Onowa McIvor
Autumnseptember Halkomelem
Merryquery Saulteau First Nations
Bryonyrosee Kwak'wala
Y.h.w Mohawk language
Missycwebb Daryl Baldwin
Keedlebeedle
Mrattliff Council of the Haida Nation
Altlanguage FirstVoices
Crystalazak Nisga'a language
Annieguerin Kwak'wala
Kskrine Secwepemc
Adoricic Language Creation Society
Brandonmatthewpeters Comox language
Mlekei Brenda Farnell
Nickolegem Casiguran Dumagat Agta
TiGERA Sechelt language
Jerinaforestall Evenki language
Eliza413 Kutenai language
Rinpeterson Tagish language
Jigokuyari Ainu languages
Y.l.w Nisga'a language
Mebis3 Nuu-chah-nulth language
AAG1D Old Norse orthography Old Norse orthography
Lisannet Lillooet language, St'at'imc
Resa6482
Tonitonzzz Leanne Hinton
Deanname Quechuan languages
Alreed79 Heiltsuk dialect

Timeline

Week 1

Course meetings
Tuesday, 17 October 2017
In class - Introduction to the Wikipedia project

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 "Get Help" button on this page.

To get started, please review the following handouts:

Assignment - Get started on 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! 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.
Milestones

This week, everyone should have a Wikipedia account.

Week 2

Course meetings
Tuesday, 24 October 2017
Assignment - Evaluate Wikipedia

It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles. You'll evaluate a Wikipedia article related to the course and leave suggestions for improving it on the article's Talk page.

  • Complete the "Evaluating Articles and Sources" training (linked below).
  • Create a section in your sandbox titled "Article evaluation" where you'll leave notes about your observations and learnings.
  • Choose an article on Wikipedia related to your course 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?
  • 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 — ~~~~.
In class - Discussion
What's a content gap?

Now that you're thinking about what makes a "good" Wikipedia article, consider some additional questions.

  • Wikipedians often talk about "content gaps." 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 "unbiased" on Wikipedia? How is that different, or similar, to your own definition of "bias"?
Assignment - Add to an article

Familiarize yourself with editing Wikipedia by adding a citation to an article. 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.

Week 3

Course meetings
Tuesday, 31 October 2017
In class - Discussion
Thinking about sources and plagiarism
  • 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?
Assignment - Choose possible topics
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Finally, present your choices to your instructor for feedback.

Week 4

Course meetings
Tuesday, 7 November 2017
Assignment - Finalize your topic / Find your sources
  • 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.
Assignment - Draft your article

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 "lead section." Write it in your sandbox.
    • A "lead" 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

Milestones

Everyone has begun writing their article drafts.

Week 5

Course meetings
Tuesday, 14 November 2017
Assignment - Begin moving your work to Wikipedia

Once you've made improvements to your article based on peer review feedback, it's time to move your work to Wikipedia proper - the "mainspace."

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 [[../../../training/students/sandboxes|Sandboxes and Mainspace]] online training.

Week 6

Course meetings
Tuesday, 21 November 2017
Assignment - Final article

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 Wikipedia Expert at any time!
Assignment - Reflective essay

Write a reflective essay (2–5 pages) on your Wikipedia contributions.

Consider the following questions as you reflect on your Wikipedia assignment:

  • 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?
Milestones

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