Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Washington University/Behavioral Ecology 2022 (Fall)
| This Course
|
Wikipedia Resources
|
Connect
Questions? Ask us:
contact |
 | This course page is an automatically-updated version of the main course page at dashboard.wikiedu.org. Please do not edit this page directly; any changes will be overwritten the next time the main course page gets updated. |
- Course name
- Behavioral Ecology 2022
- Institution
- Washington University
- Instructor
- Joan E Strassmann
- Wikipedia Expert
- Ian (Wiki Ed)
- Subject
- Behavioral Ecology
- Course dates
- 2022-08-30 00:00:00 UTC – 2022-12-09 23:59:59 UTC
- Approximate number of student editors
- 54
Why take this course? This course is about understanding why organisms evolve to act the way they do. We focus on social behaviors and particularly on understanding conflict and cooperation. How do genetically distinct individuals cooperate while still favoring their own interests? We study things like the evolution of aggression, mating behavior, parental care, communication, and the complexities of living in groups and families. We will learn how natural selection operates on individuals in a social context. We study less material in more depth, with many videos. This class is a lot of work, a lot of fun, and you will never look at an animal in the same way.
What will you learn? This course is about how animals behave in their environment. You will learn to be skeptical and critical of logically incomplete arguments. You will learn how to formulate and evaluate hypotheses. You will learn to evaluate material for accuracy in data, in logic, and in conclusions. You will understand the nature of scientific evidence. You will learn to understand how natural selection operates, particularly on behavior. One of the most effective ways of learning is to teach and communicate the material you just learned. In this class you will learn to teach, to write, to collaborate, and to engage in the dialogue of Wikipedia.
Timeline
Week 1
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 30 August 2022 | Thursday, 1 September 2022
- Assignment - First assignment, Behavioral Ecology 472
Wikipedia allows for any user to create or edit an entry without registering, but registration is required for this assignment so that we can confirm that you created the entry. To create an account, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page.
In the upper right corner is a link entitled Log In / create account. Click on the link and follow the directions listed to create your account. After you have created your username, you will be redirected to a page, where you should see “Login successful.”
Do ALL the tutorials. These are much more reliable than the instructions below. Be sure you accomplish the things in the instructions below, however.
1. Create a User Page
You should also create a User Page, so people know who you are. Click on your newly created account name, which appears in red in the upper right hand corner of the Wikipedia page. You will then be redirected to your user page, which should have a header that reads “User:<Your Username>” In order to create your user page, click on the link towards the upper right hand corner where it says “Create.”
After clicking on the “Create” link, you will be redirected to a page with a header that reads “Editing User:<Your Username>” with a large text box. In the large text box compose 2-3 sentences about yourself, indicating that you are a student, and highlight your interests and areas of Wikipedia you wish to contribute. You can say that you are a Wash U student working in particular on pages about butterflies and moths. You can also tell something else about yourself to inspire others to start contributing, or mention any other areas you might contribute on in the future. This is your chance to show real people write for Wikipedia.
Scroll below and click “Save Page.” At this point the link containing your account name will change in color from red to blue indicating that a linked page now exists. In general, anything written by editors with identities is more trustworthy than information in red, throughout Wikipedia. Here is an example of a user page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Agelaia.
2. Put a photo of yourself on your page (Optional)
To put a photo of yourself on your page, when viewing your user page (by clicking on your account name at the upper right hand corner of the Wikipedia page) click on Edit near the top right of the page. Above the short description of yourself, input the following code:
{{Infobox person
| name = <your name>
| image = <photo_file_name.jpg>
| nationality =
| birth_date =
| birth_place =
| death_date =
| death_place =
| occupation =
| salary =
| networth =
| children =
| website =
| module =
| module3 = | This user was a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador. |
}}
Put your name where it says <your name> and replace the <photo_file_name.jpg> with a file name you would like for your photo followed by a .jpg extension (e.g. CVern.jpg). Save your changes.
When you view your user page, you will notice that the photo has not shown up yet. This is because you need to upload an (open source—e.g. a photo taken by yourself that you don’t mind sharing (see below)) image of yourself. To do so, click on the file name you just created in the infobox you just created. This will take you to a file creation page, where you can upload your photo. Before you submit, make sure to give some details on where the photo is from and provide licensing info through the licensing pull down menu below the “upload file” button (suggestion is Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0).
4. Create a Sandbox (Click on “Sandbox” on the upper right corner of Wikipedia)
The sandbox feature of Wikipedia is a place where you can start and edit your contribution until you are ready to fully release it on Wikipedia. You will create a sandbox inside your user space. This sandbox will allow you to practice Wikipedia syntax and editing without being fully held to the standards in Wikipedia:Manual of Style. You can work on your article in this space at first, but when assignments are due, they must be uploaded to fully visible Wikipedia.
Instructions:
1. Go to your user page (space you are in after you click on your Username) and click “Edit” (among the options on top right).
2. In the textbox go to the line after the sentences describing yourself and type . This will create a sandbox link with an illustrative picture.
3. Scroll below the box and click on "Save page" to save the changes.
Do what it takes so you show up on the course page:
- Assignment - 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:
- Editing Wikipedia pages 1–5
- Evaluating Wikipedia
- 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! 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.
- Milestones
This week, everyone should have a Wikipedia account.
Week 2
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 6 September 2022 | Thursday, 8 September 2022
- Assignment - Review 5 existing Wikipedia pages on Amphibians
Assignment 2: Review of Wikipedia assignment
Wikipedia Assignment 2: Review 5 existing Wikipedia pages
Behavioral Ecology, Biology 472, Strassmann
Due: Thursday 22September 11:59 PM
Points: 70
What exactly do I turn in? You turn in a Word document on Canvas that contains your comments on five Wikipedia pages of different lizard species, along with a link to one comment you posted on a Wikipedia Talk page. Call it <lastnamefirstname>Wiki22Sept
In this assignment you will find and read five organism-based entries and evaluate them, as described below. You will also put something on the talk pages of each organism to get comfortable with adding information. It does not have to be too detailed.
Join the WikiProject for Amphibians and Reptiles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Amphibians_and_Reptiles
WikiProject pages are places to discuss the overall organization of knowledge in Wikipedia on a certain topic and to alert WikiProject communities about the importance of developing pages in a particular area. This is not the place to discuss details relating to specific changes you will make to a page if the overall categorization of the knowledge makes sense.
According to the WikiProject Guide, a WikiProject is a group of editors that collaborate on encyclopedic work at collection of pages devoted to the management of a specific topic or family of topics within Wikipedia. It is not a place to write or discuss the details of specific encyclopedia articles, but a resource to help coordinate, organize, and share ideas about article writing.
Your contribution should make your aim clear to other Wikipedia editors. Keep in mind that other Wikipedia editors may access your user page to better understand your contributions.
Instructions:
To begin, as stated above, join this WikiProject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Amphibians_and_Reptiles
1.
a. Since we are all working on frogs or toads, or other amphibians, though I will generally refer to frogs, everyone should join this project. Add your username to the list of participants for this WikiProject.
b. All WikiProjects are different, but instructions for adding yourself to the project list of participants can usually be located by looking through the WikiProject page's outline. To add yourself to this WikiProject list, edit the participant list and add your username in alphabetical order.
c. Once you are a member of the project, you should contribute to that project's discussion page to notify the community of your planned work.
2. Write brief commentaries on 5 entries. You will post at least part of one of your commentaries on the corresponding Wiki page’s Talk page. These do not all need to be put on Wikipedia, unless you want to.
a. Consider the criteria for Good Article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria/ , and evaluate where this piece hits or misses the mark in answering the questions in the rubric. We have class members every semester that make it to Good Article and one who made it to Featured Article.
Look at entries on 5 frogs. Each student should do five different species, but you don’t have to check around with everyone. Just choose independently. You should pick organisms that have fairly thorough entries to do this assignment. Here are some examples. Do not use any of these examples to do the assignment, but you should look at them to get a feel for good work. One of the things to be careful about is that there be enough behavioral information on the lizard that you choose. Most of the Wikipedia pages I’ve looked at have more other topics.
One way to find frogs is to pick a journal like Animal Behaviour, Behavioral Ecology, Behavioral Ecology, and Sociobiology, or Annual Review of Ecology and Evolution and then do a search for lizard or frogs in the whole journal. This will point you to frogs that people study from the behavioral perspective.
Write a paragraph evaluating the entry. Consider how complete the entry is. Note missing categories focusing on behavior. Often a good way to tell what is missing is to compare different entries. Comment on the writing. Look at the Talk, History and Discussion sections and comment on what you see there. Do you agree with the comments? Do you agree with the importance ranking? Your comments on each entry will be about 200 words. Remember, you do not need to solve the problems you see, or do any research. The purpose of this assignment is to get you comfortable with looking at and evaluating Wikipedia entries in the area of your specialty. Details are expanded under grading rubric, below:
| Grading rubric: 70 points in all, 14 points per organism, 5 organisms |
| For each organism: Name the organism and give a brief overview of the entry |
| 5 points: What are the strengths of this entry? What have you learned that is most interesting? |
| 5 points: Name 3 general categories in the outline that are missing and could be included. Explain why for each. |
| 4 points: Look at the talk page. Comment on the details here, including the ranking and importance of the article. |
| Full points will be given to entries in each category that are thorough, exhibit careful thinking, and tie to the material of the course. Your writing should be intelligible without going back to the original Wikipedia page. |
- 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"?
Week 3
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 13 September 2022 | Thursday, 15 September 2022
- 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 4
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 20 September 2022 | Thursday, 22 September 2022
- Assignment - Write a Wikipedia article with 7 refs and 1500 words
W
Wikipedia Assignment 3: Write Wikipedia entry of 7 refs and 1500 words
Behavioral Ecology, Biology 472, Strassmann
Due: Thursday 6 October 11:59 PM
Points: 150 points out of the 700 total for the entire Wikipedia assignment.
What do I turn in: A document on Canvas named <lastnamefirstname>Wiki6Oct with the following:
1. Your name.
2. Names of others in your group (one or two names), and what they did on your paper.
3. Your organism.
4. Links to your Wikipedia entry, which should be live on Wikipedia.
5. A paragraph describing exactly how you exercised your fact checking, writing, or Wikipedia expertise.. (20 points).
6. Paste into the document at least 1500-word entry along with the 7 references (130 points).
In this assignment you will add at least 7 scientific references and at least 1500 words to an existing Wikipedia entry, or begin a new one. View the 1500 words as a minimum. An excellent A+ contribution will have much more. Each person should do her own independent assignment. Only after they are done does the rest of the team check the work. This is not a group assignment. However, you can talk with each other to help you decide what to work on.
Claim your frog here. Only the name on this Google Sheet can work on this frog. Choose ones with stub or stub plus entries already: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1S7u9JCFpcROgYjMWCVTYQXg9jf4hE6HI6p20vICWtkQ/edit#gid=0
What do I do? In this assignment you will further use your expertise in behavioral ecology to improve Wikipedia. Focus on the entry of a single organism under the Lizard WikiProject that you have chosen. We provide a list of likely frogs with an incomplete Wikipedia page and enough scholarly references, but you are free to choose others if there is enough information on them. The organism that you choose should have information in the literature on its behavior. You should discuss what exactly the animal does that is of interest and why they have evolved to do it. Remember to follow the general format of Wikipedia with lots of headings. Also, be sure to follow the order of topics specified by the Lizard project and by our class. The writing should have as parallel a structure as possible.
Should I add headings in the Wikipedia entry? Yes. Wikipedia prefers relatively short chunks of text, 200 to 600 words. Headings are key to helping readers navigate through the page. You should also be sure to keep the outline at the beginning of the entry up to date, reflecting any new headings you have added.
Can I change areas of the Wikipedia entry on this organism that are not behavior? Yes, you can change anything you like on this or other organisms. You may add things that are missing like geographic distribution, diet, taxonomy, appearance, or links to Wikimedia photos, for example. Your goal is to provide a complete Wikipedia entry on your lizard, with focus on behavior. Anything you add should follow the Wikipedia principles, hold a neutral tone, and be well referenced.
Can you give me some examples of good work on Wikipedia in this general area? OK, here are a few. The article on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anolis_oculatus is on its way to being a Good Article. The entry for Gila Monster, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gila_monster, is currently rated as Good Article status. One of my students, Ben Ong, brought the piece on the American white ibis a lot of the way towards being a Good Article, then a Featured Article. You can reach this status. After all, it was done mostly by an undergraduate.
I want all of you to reach the standards of Good Articles, given here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GACR#Criteria.
How do I get a draft of the assignment from my partners so I can serve my role as Wikipedia expert, writing expert, or fact checker? Ask them for their assignment. Give them your assignment so they can do their role. Leave time to do this before the final deadline, because you will have to revise your entry according to their comments, or get help uploading the work. You might consider having a last session together so you can contribute your role efficiently and chat with them as you do it. Teamwork works well with frequent face-to-face contact.
Do I have to actually change something on Wikipedia? Yes. Add your modifications to the appropriate page. Include the course banner. Briefly describe what you have done on the talk page for your topic.
Do I have to include images of the organism? Yes, and these must not be taken from any source that is not Creative Commons licensed. The best way to be sure is to search for images on Wikimedia and then use only those with clear licensing as Creative Commons and available. Please look at the original source of your photo and make sure it fits in with the correct commons licenses allowed for Wikipedia (see link below). Also make sure that you license it correctly when you upload to Wikipedia. This has been a stumbling block in the past, so right from the beginning be sure you can get a good, open source picture of your lizard.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing
Can I delete stuff that is already there in the article? Yes, you should delete anything that is incorrect, or is not referenced. You should also delete anything that is under copyright and taken improperly. Be sure you explain your deletes in the talk page.
Can I copy information that I find from another source? No, that would be plagiarism. You can cannot copy content entirely, nor can you just change the words around while keeping the general structure and ideas of another person. If you do this, the penalty will be severe, in accord with Wash U rules. If you detect plagiarism in any work already up on Wikipedia, or by a classmate, tell me or your Friday discussion leader.
Grading rubric: 150 points
| Points | Item |
| 10 | Describe how you fulfilled your role (writing, Wikipedia, fact checker) for the others in your group. Be specific. |
| 10 | Describe what others in your group did for you (writing, Wikipedia, fact checker) and how you responded to their advice. |
| Complete right hand box with taxonomic info and photo(s) | |
| Overview is one of the sections at the very beginning. See instructions§ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section | |
| 130 | Sections behavior through humans add thoughtful sections which should include the Taxobox if it does not already exist and the overview (max 10 points each). Follow the outline order and do not change the heading wording but you can add new headings. |
| You must add at least 7 references and 1500 words | |
| 20 | Bonus for 5 extra sections & excellence, typically with more words (extra credit) |
| Work that gets full points will be carefully referenced, clear, well written, and detailed. |
- 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 your topic / Find your sources
It's time to choose an article and assign it to yourself.
- Review page 6 of your Editing Wikipedia guidebook.
- Find an article from the list of "Available Articles" on the Articles tab on this course page. When you find the one you want to work on, click Select to assign it 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.
- 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 5
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 27 September 2022 | Thursday, 29 September 2022
- 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 6
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 4 October 2022 | Thursday, 6 October 2022
- Assignment - Peer review of three classmate's articles, Behavioral Ecology 472
WikiProject Assignment 4 Peer review of 3 entries
Behavioral Ecology, Biology 472, Strassmann
In this assignment you will review 3 entries by other students that are not in your editing group.
When is it due? 20 October 11:59 PM
What is it worth? It is worth 60 points out of the 700 total for the entire Wikipedia assignment.
What exactly do I turn in? You turn in a document on Canvas named <lastnamefirstname>Wiki20Oct.doc with the following:
1. Your name.
2. Names and links to the 3 entries you review. Your Friday Discussion Leader will assign the articles for you to look at. They will be from people in your discussion section but not in your editing group.
3. A clear description of what you have changed, what we should look for.
What do I do? By now you should be fairly comfortable with editing on Wikipedia. This is your chance to help out your fellow classmates, and shine yourself. It is also a chance to read more broadly than your single chapter, even if it is just out of the textbook. Use your expertise to read your classmates’s entries. Feel free to add material, edit material, and put comments on the talk pages. It is hard to give a specific rubric as to what you should do, because you will encounter variable entries. What you should do is improve them. You can do this by adding material that is missing, by editing the writing or organization to make it more clear, and by contributing to the talk page. Look again at the criteria for Good Articles, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria, and think about where this one meets the mark or falls short. Of course, besides these criteria we have specific interests in improving the behavioral side of the entries.
Should I add headings in the Wikipedia entry? Yes, if necessary. Headings are valuable and your perspective may point to additional headings that may be needed. Just be sure that if you put more in, you also add them to the outline at the beginning.
Can I change areas of the Wikipedia entry on this organism that are not behavior? Yes, you can change anything you like on this or other organisms. You may add things that are missing like geographic distribution, diet, taxonomy, appearance, or links to Wikimedia photos, for example. Anything you add should follow the Wikipedia principles, hold a neutral tone, and be well referenced. Remember, the more words we add, the more likely our class will shine among all Wikipedia classes.
Do I have to actually change something on Wikipedia? Yes. Add your modifications to the appropriate page. Include the course banner (see the bottom of the course Wikipedia page for directions), if it is not already there. Briefly describe what you have done on the talk page of each of the articles you peer review.
| Grading rubric: 60 points in all, 20 points per article, 3 articles |
| For each article: |
| 5 points: Contribute to the Talk page. This can be comments about the article and/or explaining what you changed in the article. |
| 15 points: Make meaningful comments and changes to help improve the article. |
- In class - Discussion
- Thinking about Wikipedia
- What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"?
- 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?
- Assignment - Expand your draft
- Keep working on transforming your article into a complete first draft. Get draft ready for peer-review.
- If you'd like a Wikipedia Expert to review your draft, now is the time! Click the "Get Help" button in your sandbox to request notes.
- Assignment - Peer review and copy edit
- First, take the "Peer Review" 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. Then in the "My Articles" section of the Home tab, assign them to yourself to review.
- 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?
- Milestones
Every student has finished reviewing their assigned articles, making sure that every article has been reviewed.
Week 7
- Course meetings
-
- Thursday, 13 October 2022
- Assignment - Respond to your peer review
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 Wikipedia Expert if you have any questions.
Week 8
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 18 October 2022 | Thursday, 20 October 2022
- Assignment - Write another 1500 words with 7 references, Behavioral Ecology 472
WikiProject Assignment 5
Behavioral Ecology, Biology 472, Strassmann
In this assignment you will write about another spider with 7 references and 1500 words. Each person does their own independent assignment. Only after they are done does the rest of the team check the work. This is not a group assignment. However you can talk with each other to help you decide what to work on.
When is it due? 3November 11:59 PM
What is it worth? It is worth 150 points out of the 700 total for the entire Wikipedia assignment.
This assignment is exactly like Assignment 3, so follow those instructions.
- 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 Sandboxes and Mainspace online training.
- Assignment - Did You Know
- Optional: For new articles or qualifying expansions of stubs, compose a one-sentence “hook,” nominate it for “Did you know,” (see the DYK instructions handout) and monitor the nomination for any issues identified by other editors. Wiki Education staff can provide support for this process.
Handout: "Did You Know" submissions
Week 9
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 25 October 2022 | Thursday, 27 October 2022
- Assignment - Continue improving your article
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.
- Consider adding an image to your article. Wikipedia has strict rules about what media can be added, so make sure to take Contributing Images and Media Files training before you upload an image.
Week 10
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 1 November 2022 | Thursday, 3 November 2022
- Assignment - Peer Review 3 entries
Peer review of 3 classmate's articles, Behavioral Ecology 472
Assignment
WikiProject Assignment 6 Peer review of 3 entries
Behavioral Ecology, Biology 472, Strassmann
In this assignment you will review 3 entries by other students that are not in your editing group.
When is it due? Thursday 17 November 11:59 PM
What is it worth? It is worth 60 points out of the 700 total for the entire Wikipedia assignment.
This assignment is exactly like assignment 4, so refer to the instructions there.
- Assignment - Polish your work
Continue to expand and improve your work, and format your article to match Wikipedia's tone and standards. Remember to contact your Wikipedia Expert at any time if you need further help!
Week 11
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 8 November 2022 | Thursday, 10 November 2022
- Assignment - Respond to peer review comments, revise, polish, and link, Behavioral Ecolo
WikiProject Assignment 7 Revise and link
Behavioral Ecology, Biology 472, Strassmann
When is it due? 1 December 11:59 PM
What is it worth? It is worth 100 points out of the 700 total for the entire Wikipedia assignment.
What exactly do I turn in? You turn in a document on Canvas named <lastnamefirstname>Wiki8 Dec with the following:
1. Your name.
2. Names and links to the 3 entries that you visit and change, adding links to your entry as appropriate, also modifying the text as needed to make the link relevant.
3. A clear description of what you have changed, what we should look for.
4. A sentence or two on your opinions of the Good and Featured articles you have looked at.
5. Three new articles you think should be nominated for Good Article, can be from the class or elsewhere. Please do not nominate them yourselves, just let us know which ones and why. You can modify those articles to bring them up to Good Article status. They may need help in areas not directly relevant to behavior, for example. By now you should be familiar with reading the refereed literature. This is where improvements should come from.
What do I do?
1. With this assignment, you keep modifying and adding to your previous work. You add links. You evaluate other work.
2. You also make it more part of the fabric of knowledge by visiting other sites and adding links to your entry at the other site. Do this for 10 entries, so you will have those 10 links into your site. Apparently there are not likely to be 10 entries that are close to your material that are Good Articles or Featured Articles, so just find 10 other articles that can link to your area. They can be animals close to ones you wrote about, or topics. So, you could all put a link to your page from the Behavioral Ecology page, or the Evolution page. Do the same for Parental Care, Parent-Offspring Conflict, or Sexual Selection. The important thing is to add links from elsewhere to your page. But don’t link to super general pages since these will be taken down.
3. Find 5 articles as close as possible to your area that are Good Articles, or Featured Articles. Learn what they have that yours does not. Write a paragraph for Canvas that describes what you have found. Here is a list of all the Good Articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_articles/Natural_sciences#Biology_and_medicine
Here is a list of the Featured articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_articles
Look for the section on animals.
Check out in particular these:
cattle egret: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle_Egret/
ruff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruff/
whit-winged fairywren: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White-winged_Fairywren/
But your article will have much more behavior than these do. Here is a featured article on a fly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse-fly . Please work to this standard.
4. Now you are more experienced as to what a Good Article is, fix your entry so it meets the GA standards. This may well involve adding content that is not behavior. This is fine. Here is the link to what a Good Article is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_articles/
5. Please do not nominate your entry for Good Article if you feel it has reached this stage, but let us know if you think it should be nominated. Ultimately you will nominate your article for GA if we agree it is good enough. This is because it is the nominator that does additional work required by the Wikipedia community.
6 Find 3 other articles (from class or not) that you think should be nominated for Good Article. Write a few sentences on why they should be nominated. Make any changes to make them fit GA status.
What if other Wikipedians have taken down or totally changed my entry? Look at why they did this. If it is because there were serious problems with it, fix them. If it is because the others felt the material did not fit, and you disagree, argue with them. Get help from others in the class to participate. Do your best to keep your material up there, even if modified. Try to understand what is going on. Ask us. You can also work on modifying and expanding what others have put up. I do not think this will be a big problem if you have worked on an animal for which there is little information and done it properly.
Should I add more headings in the Wikipedia entry? Yes, if necessary. Wikipedia prefers relatively short chunks of text, 200 to 600 words, it seems. Headings are key to helping readers navigate through the page. You should also be sure to keep the outline at the beginning of the entry up to date, reflecting any new headings you have added.
Why are links so important? Where should I add them? You should add links both in your piece and in other pieces so they link to your piece. But don’t add links to very general things only marginally related to your topic. If your animal occurs in Europe, for example, do not put in a link on the Europe page. It will cause an uproar. The Wikipedia community is very vigilant. But the internet is all about links, so the more appropriate ones you put in, the better. It is how we get around, besides basic searches.
| Points | Item |
| 20 Points |
Names and links to 3 entries that you linked your article to, with description of where you added your link. |
| 40 Points | Description of what you changed in your article. |
| 20 Points | Your opinions on the 5 Good and Featured articles you looked at. |
| 20 Points |
Names, links and reasoning of 3 articles you think should be nominated for Good Article status. |
Bonus Writing
Write a Wikipedia article for one of the following people or other outstanding professors lacking complete Wikipedia pages. This assignment is worth 50 to100 additional points depending upon how good the entry is. Please let us know if you intend to work on this assignment. Here are some people who might need pages, but before you pick them, be sure they meet the standards on the next page and that they do not already have full pages. I have put some things that should qualify them
Judith Bronstein, lots of honors, Editor in chief of American Naturalist,
https://eeb.arizona.edu/person/judith-bronstein
Nancy G. Solomon Executive Editor Animal Behaviour https://www.journals.elsevier.com/animal-behaviour/editorial-board
Anna Dornhaus check out the for the public tab on her page:
https://socialinsectlab.arizona.edu/content/our-science-public-media
Eileen Hebets
Aimee Dunlap
Inés Ibáñez
Kasey Fowler-Finn
Kay Holekamp
Karen Wiebe
Regina Baucom
Here are some sample good pages though yours do not have to be anything like this long:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Jane_West-Eberhard (Links to an external site.) look at the references for her for inspiration, like this one: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/eva.12343 (Links to an external site.)
Or this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeanne_Altmann (Links to an external site.)
Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Otto (Links to an external site.)
Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_Rosemary_Grant (Links to an external site.)
This type of article falls under the category of Biographies of living persons. Please look at general article guidelines and format over here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons (Links to an external site.)
There are two challenges with writing “Biographies of Living Persons”. Is the subject notable? Are the sources reliable?
Are they notable?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(academics) (Links to an external site.)
Academics meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources (Links to an external site.), are notable. Academics meeting none of these conditions may still be notable if they meet the conditions of WP:BIO (Links to an external site.) or other notability criteria. The merits of an article on the academic will depend largely on the extent to which it is verifiable (Links to an external site.). Before applying these criteria, see the General notes and Specific criteria notes sections, which follow.
1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.
2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.
3. The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences (Links to an external site.)or the Royal Society (Links to an external site.)) or a fellow (Links to an external site.) of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (Links to an external site.)).
4. The person's academic work has made a significant impact in the area of higher education (Links to an external site.), affecting a substantial number of academic institutions.
5. The person has held a named chair (Links to an external site.)appointment or distinguished professor (Links to an external site.) appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon.
6. The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society.
7. The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.
8. The person has been the head or chief editor of a major, well-established academic journal in their subject area.
To avoid your page from being taken down instantly please defend why your subject is notable by mentioning which of the above conditions they fulfill in the talk page.
What are some good/reliable sources for academics?
Unfortunately, the Wikipedia guidelines for biographies page is better at listing what are NOT good sources over which ones are. You can find that information over here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons (Links to an external site.)
But what we can glean as good sources are:
1. A profile of the scientist published by a society/journal on receipt of an award or when elected as a member is a very good source. For example: Profile of Dr. Nancy Moran by PNAS.
https://www.pnas.org/content/102/47/16916 (Links to an external site.)
2. The university’s webpage on the scientist
3. “Self-published blogs” defined as personal blogs on the subject by other individuals or a group are a BAD source. Unless the subject themselves have published the blog. There are living persons who publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used as a source only if:
1. it is not unduly self-serving;
2. it does not involve claims about third parties;
3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.
Thus, if using lab websites of the scientist as a source ensure that there are other credible sources too.
- 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?