Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

WikiWomen Erasmus+/Schools toolkit/Exploring the topic area

< WikiWomen Erasmus+ | Schools toolkit
Translate this page
Other languages:

Lesson 4: Exploring the topic area

edit
 

Lesson Outcome

  • Understand the criteria for a good standard Wikipedia article.
  • Identify appropriate sources for research.
  • Choose a suitable article for further development.
  • Lesson Duration: 40 minutes —
    English PDF
    Translatable PPTX

Introduction (5 minutes):

  • Let’s Recap the importance of understanding how Wikipedia works to learn how to research and write good articles for Wikipedia.
  • Quick Discussion Prompts:
    • What makes a good standard article on Wikipedia?
    • What types of sources for information can we use?
    • Discuss what makes a good standard article on Wikipedia: comprehensiveness, reliable sources, citations, and neutrality.

Recap (5 minutes):
Refresh some of the 5 Pillars: Stay Neutral

  • All Wikipedia articles (and other encyclopaedic content) must be written from a neutral point of view without bias.
  • No personal views, no opinions.
  • Rewrite articles that are clearly written with bias.

Verifiability

  • Verifiability means that people reading and editing the encyclopedia can check that information comes from a reliable source.
  • Material and quotations must be attributed to a reliable, published source.
  • Citations needed for every article - we’ll go through how to do this later!

Verifiability, not truth

  • Checkable Facts:
    • Information must come from reliable sources & others should be able to verify it.
  • No Personal Ideas:
    • Can't add personal beliefs or experiences, stick to what's already published and proven.
  • Balance and Neutrality:
    • If sources disagree with each other, stay neutral & present all sides fairly, giving each perspective its fair share

Verifiability, no original research, and neutral point of view are Wikipedia's core content policies. They work together to determine content, so editors should understand the key points of all three.

See more on Verifiability on Wikipedia here: en:Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable_sources

What counts as a reliable source?

  • The work itself

The article, book: "That book looks like a useful source for this article.") and works like it ("An obituary can be a useful biographical source", "A recent source is better than an old one")

  • The creator of the work

The writer, journalist: "What do we know about that source's reputation?") and people like them ("A medical researcher is a better source than a journalist for..").

  • The publication

(for example, the newspaper, journal, magazine: "That source covers the arts.") and publications like them ("A newspaper is not a reliable source for medical facts").

  • The publisher of the work

(for example, Cambridge University Press: "That source publishes reference works.") and publishers like them ("An academic publisher is a good source of reference works"). See More: w:Wikipedia:Verifiability#What_counts_as_a_reliable_source Avoid Conflicts of interest!

  • Transparency is key.
  • Do not edit articles about yourself, your family or friends, your organisation, your clients, or your competitors.

Question for the Class: Can you think of any conflicts of interest you might have?

Class Discussion (10 minutes): (5 minutes)

  • Prompt: Where would you look for sources for your article?
    • Encourage students to share their strategies and experiences in finding credible sources.
    • Some ideas: School Library, Library in City, Town, County or Region, Local Museum, Newspapers, Online Sources, Local Archive

(5 minutes)

  • Prompt: What topic or person do you want to write about for your article?
    • Some ideas: if students don’t have a specific woman they want to research, they can explore their own interests to find a notable woman
    • Example 1: someone interested in soccer might choose to write about the regional or national women’s soccer team
    • Example 2: someone interested in music might choose to write about a female music artist from the region

Introduction to Tools (10 minutes):

  • Introduce Gap Finder and explain how it helps identify missing articles in different language Wikipedias.
  • Demonstrate how to use categories to find missing articles, using the example of comparing English and Irish language Wikipedias for "20th-century Irish women artists."

Group Activity (6 minutes):

  • Divide students into small groups.
  • Each group explores Gap Finder and Category searches to identify potential articles that need improvement or expansion.
  • Groups discuss their findings and select one article they find promising for further development.
  • Have you noticed an important article that is missing from in your Wikipedia?

Some Online Resources (3 minutes) Adapt this to your context

Homework Activity:

  • Students individually research the chosen article using the identified sources.
  • Use of some the resources we identified earlier: libraries, online resources for biographies and histories.
  • They evaluate the article's existing content, citations, and overall quality.
  • Add some notes to your sandbox for the article to review in our next class.
  • Encourage use of Sandbox to practise working in Wikipedia.

Note: Encourage students to think critically about the quality of the articles they choose, emphasising the importance of contributing valuable and accurate information to the Wikipedia platform. This lesson aims to empower students to make informed decisions about their chosen articles, laying the foundation for their upcoming research and writing activities.


← Lesson 3 Wikipedia Editing Basics — Lesson 5 Research Skills →
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=WikiWomen_Erasmus%2B/Schools_toolkit/Exploring_the_topic_area&oldid=27981088"