Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/University of Chicago/History of Skepticism (Winter Quarter)
| 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
- History of Skepticism
- Institution
- University of Chicago
- Instructor
- Ada Palmer
- Wikipedia Expert
- Shalor (Wiki Ed)
- Subject
- History of Philosophy
- Course dates
- 2018-01-09 00:00:00 UTC – 2018-03-15 23:59:59 UTC
- Approximate number of student editors
- 75
Before we ask what is true or false, we must ask how we can know what is true or false. This course examines the vital role doubt and philosophical skepticism have played in the Western intellectual tradition, from pre-Socratic Greece through the Enlightenment, with a focus on how Criteria of Truth—what kinds of arguments are considered legitimate sources of certainty—have changed over time. The course will examine dialog between skeptical and dogmatic thinkers, and how many of the most fertile systems in the history of philosophy have been hybrid systems which divided the world into things which can be known, and things which cannot. The course will touch on the history of atheism, heresy and free thought, on fideism and skeptical religion, and will examine how the Scientific Method is itself a form of philosophical skepticism. Primary source readings will include Plato, Sextus Empiricus, Lucretius, Ockham, Pierre Bayle, Montaigne, Descartes, Francis Bacon, Hobbes, Voltaire, Diderot, and others.
Timeline
Week 1
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 23 January 2018
- 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:
- 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, 30 January 2018
- 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 - Food for Thought
- What's a content gap?
Now that you're thinking about what makes a "good" Wikipedia article, consider some additional questions. You will want to keep these in mind as you choose what kind of article you want to work on. At the end of the process you will be asked to write a short, informal reflective essay on your Wikipedia editing experience and these questions may help you.
- 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, 6 February 2018
- 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?
- OPTIONAL
- Review the rules for medical topics
Wikipedia has special rules for topics related to medicine, human health, and psychology. It is unlikely that you will work on any of these topics, but if the article you want to work on turns out to be about one of these topics then you need to complete the training below.
- Best practices for working in groups
- This Wikipedia project is designed to let you work in groups so that you have peers to ask questions of as you learn and encounter challenges. That said, you are welcome to work alone as a group of one if you prefer.
- Once your group has a Wikipedia article to work on, make sure everyone in the group is assigned to that article on the Students tab of this course page.
- Select one group member whose Sandbox space you'll all share to draft your article. (It will be titled something like User:Diderot/sandbox.) Each person should link to that shared Sandbox from their own Sandbox page. A sandbox is like any other page on Wikipedia, and anyone can edit it.
- Wikipedia doesn't handle multiple people editing from different devices at the same time very well. If you're working together in person, one person should add the work to the Sandbox. If you are all working independently, make small edits and save often to avoid "editing conflicts" with classmates. Make sure that you're logged in under your own Wikipedia account while editing in your classmate's sandbox to ensure your edits are recorded.
- Don't create a group account for your project. Group accounts are prohibited.
- 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.
- 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.
- Guide(s) for writing articles in your topic area
- 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 4
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 13 February 2018
- 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 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.
- 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 5
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 20 February 2018
- 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 6
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 27 February 2018
- 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.
- 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 7
- Course meetings
-
- Tuesday, 6 March 2018
- 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.