Beliveau

Welcome!

Hello, Beliveau, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Hammersoft (talk) 22:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Is this a class?

I note quite a number of new accounts all working on Ways of Seeing today. Is this an effort by a class? If so, please direct the instructor to Wikipedia:School and university projects. Be aware; I've reverted all the changes to a point before today. None of the material was cited, and considerable amounts of it were synthesized without relying on secondary sources for such synthesis. If you have questions, I'd be happy to answer. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 22:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello. There is currently a discussion at WP:AN/I regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Article Ways of Seeing being used by a class?.The discussion is about the topic Ways of Seeing. Thank you. —Hammersoft (talk) 22:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Can you please tell me if this is where I should be conversing with you about my class project?Beliveau (talk) 23:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)Beliveau

• Hi! Yes, and hello. Could you please join the discussion at Article Ways of Seeing being used by a class?. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 23:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
• Could you please inform your instructor that the means by which s/he is going about conducting the class is not inline with Wikipedia policies? Please direct them to Wikipedia:School and university projects and please ask the instructor to stop asking all of you to edit Wikipedia until they have addressed this concern. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 23:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion. I have contacted the class and asked them to discontinue contributing to the page. I thought the contribution process was less cumbersome, and the page really needed expansion.I have to say that the more complex you make this the less they can get involved in the wikipedia project.Beliveau (talk) 23:37, 5 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

• Actually, it's not cumbersome at all. However, as any good encyclopedia, we require material to be properly referenced. The class was adding substantial quantities of material to the article without properly citing any of it. That's a non-starter for an encyclopedia. Perhaps this is a good lesson for the class. We do welcome class participation! But, it should start with the instructor reading Wikipedia:School and university projects. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:41, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience with me and with my class. I thought this would be an efficient way to get them to learn to be wikipedia contributors with a single small page contribution to a weak page. Should I dump the whole idea, or is there a simple procedure that I can send to them for the preferred citation format so that there contributions can appear on the page? Thanks again.Beliveau (talk) 23:47, 5 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

• Ok, to clarify then; you are the instructor? Your best course of action here is to read Wikipedia:School and university projects. See especially the guidelines section. Start a project area for your class. We heartily welcome your class! --Hammersoft (talk) 23:49, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes I am the instructor. Earlier this afternoon, I went to the page and posted an addition 9which is the first one that you probably went back and removed.) I saw it on the page, and then in class demonstrated the posting and the history page. I asked them to set up accounts and then read though the existing "Ways of Seeing" page and make a contribution. (We have been studying the book and the series for the last three weeks.) They started to post, and then the flurry of activity and the removals occurred. The contributions I have seen from the students are a good start for them to get involved, but they cannot interact if all the posting are pulled. what is it that they need to include for their contributions to follow wikipedia guidelines? Remember that they are new at this, I am new at using this in class, and I would like to learn how to get students involved, but really in the "without facilitators" structure...at least at this point. If I can get a handle on how to teach with it, I can devote more time to the incorporation in the future, but this was really a brief extra credit way of getting them involved. Beliveau (talk) 23:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau Has my user page been deleted?Beliveau (talk) 00:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

• No, you never had one until you started it just now. I checked. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
• Edit conflict. Your user page has not been deleted. Until someone posts on a page it remains a "red link". Your post there of about an hour ago was the initial post that created the page. Tiderolls 01:30, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

got it...thanks. I had been having a conversation as reproduced above, so I thought the page was already active. as I mentioned above, is there a way for my students to contribute to the page for "ways of Seeing"? Or can you tell me how to set up a class project? I looked at the project page, but could not tell how to get a project page for my students to do a practice page set up. Thanks.Beliveau (talk) 02:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

Did you see the table titled "Action plan"? There are a few steps that precede the commencement of your project. Tiderolls 02:43, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes I read that and I will certainly plan further ahead in the future, but is there a way I can have my students contribute to this page more immediately? The page is for a book they have been studying, and they have a window of a couple days to make this contribution if they are going to. I can get them to add citations for what they want to add, but it seems like this has gotten more complicated than just registering and making a contribution, which was how I thought this worked for any particular contribution. Not trying to be difficult, I'm just trying to get my students to learn how to make contributions, and I have a very limited amount of time to do it if this is possible. If it's not possible, I understand, but that is a bit alienating for them as new to this process. Thanks again.Beliveau (talk) 03:03, 6 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

There are also several suggestions discussed on the school project page for alternate venues to "practice" using MediaWiki software. To edit here your students will be expected to follow the policies and guidelines that all editors are expected to follow. We were all new at some point and, I believe I can say with some confidence, we have all experienced some level of exasperation with the policies and guidelines. I can say that I learn everyday while editing here. I'm sure that extra help would be made available to you and your students but I doubt that policies and guidelines can be brushed aside. Some of the policies cover subjects that have legal consequences, so compromise is problematical. Tiderolls 03:58, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Follow up. I've created a page where your students may ask questions about editing on Wikipedia. Currently I will be the only editor watching that page and I work a full time job. Keeping that in mind you would understand that my time is limited. However, I will make every effort to address all concerns. That other editors will pitch in and help when they can is also a possibility. The page can be reached by clicking here. Tiderolls 04:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

I really appreciate your help. How can I set up a school project page? What I can do then is paste the existing page for "Ways of Seeing" into it, and have the students edit it from there. I can check to make sure they are citing what they are posting, and then we can potentially submit the edited text to the original page. Or not if it doesn't make it..but how can I set up a project page to let them practice? Sorry to inconvenience you, and I really appreciate your helpfulness.Beliveau (talk) 04:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

I will let someone else address this idea. I can't find a clear answer from a cursory search. If someone hasn't answered by the time I leave for work (about six hours), I will ping some folks I trust here and find an answer. Tiderolls 04:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

You might decide to use a collaboration page such as Talk:Ways of Seeing/Proposed revisions to Ways of Seeing article. You can copy the current article into that space which will then 'create' it (changing it from a red link to a blue link.) Students will then be able to work on the page there safely without impacting the 'real', or Mainspace, page and then once you feel ready you will be able to copy its contents back to the Mainspace. Keri (talk) 11:34, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

@Beliveau: I have no idea what, specifically, the class assignment was in regard to Ways of Seeing, but it seems probably that you were misled by the general tagline "The encyclopedia anyone can edit", and that you have little idea of what, exactly, an acceptable edit to this encyclopedia is. In this respect, you are doing a disservice to your students, because their edits have not been within Wikipedia policy, and have been reverted by a number of editors.

The very most basic concerns are:

• Verifiability - any editor should be able to verify the information in the encyclopedia, and they need to be able to do this through
• Citations from reliable sources - we need to be able to go to a reliable source to verify the information, this precludes
• what is called here "original research", which means personal analysis or interpretation which is not supported by a reliable source.

It does nobody any good to simply tell one's students to "go edit Wikipedia", any more than it would do them any good to tell them to "go publish a paper in a peer-reviewed journal." In both cases there are standards to be met, and requirements to fulfill, and it is your job to inform the students as to what those standards and requirements are. By allowing them to edit willy-nilly, you have abrogated that responsibility, and you need to take upon yourself the task of bringing your students up to speed, since none of their edits will be accepted here if they don't meet Wikipedia's standards. I hope that's a clear explanation. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:06, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I do acknowledge that Wikipedia is at fault as well, for continuing to push the concept that it is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit". In point of fact, anyone can edit it, but only if one adheres to our standards. Unfortunately, the PTB don't seem to want to make that clear, as it interferes with the clarity of their philosophical vision. (But, then again, they don't have to deal with the problems it causes, and we do.) Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

This explanation is clear and unclear at the same time. There is a difference between being new at something and doing something willy-nilly. My apologies for not getting my ducks in a row. You are working between two forces; working in a form that fundamentally seeks the work of new participants (which means a shallow learning curve) and at the same time wants to hold to standards that are correctly quite high (which means a much steeper learning curve). I asked my class of 330 students how many had contributed to wikipedia; there was 1 person, which I found disappointing and at the same time not surprising. More disturbing was the lack of sophistication that was presented by their educational experiences regarding WP; the basic thing we discussed in class yesterday that they had learned previously was "Don't use it, it's not reliable." I explained to them how the editing process works, emphasizing the speed of corrections, and that rather than doubt it they should consider how they should doubt the incorrectability of legacy media (print sources that are not correctable). And I encouraged them to become a contributor, which in the past I found was a shallower learning curve. Certainly in the future I will build this into a more formal section of my courses...and we have a proposed revisions talk page that I think I can use now with these students.But the project needs...I would humbly offer...better entry points if this hopes for a democratic style of participation. Beliveau (talk) 13:25, 6 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

The difference in learning curve is most probably the difference between a young project, which emphasizes the building of raw content, and a more middle-aged one which has to be less concerned about growing and more concerned about maintenance of what it has. Still, I'm not sure that, even back when Wikipedia was younger, diving in head first was a very good technique for getting started. When I started editing here in 2005, I observed for quite a while before sticking my toe in and editing as an IP, doing punctuation and spelling fixes and the like, before eventually creating an account - a pattern which I believe a lot of long-term editors will attest to. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

While BMK is correct that we have a set of rules, standards, and traditions, we also stress that they must not be applied in such a way as to thwart the efforts of newcomers. Don't be too disheartened; feel free to ask for help/assistance/guidance either at the Help desk or the Teahouse and encourage your students to do the same. Everyone here was once a newcomer, and there will always be someone ready and willing to answer your questions. Keri (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• I've worked on Talk:Ways of Seeing/Proposed revisions to Ways of Seeing article so it now shows all (I think) of the class edits - more than was ever live at any one time, because of the reverts. I hope this is useful as something to go forward with. Johnbod (talk) 13:55, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

This is great, thanks. I'm very happy with the amount of support and feedback I've received in the last day. It tells me what I need to do in the future to make this work in my classes. I have a student now trying to go through the postings to remove the duplication and re-organize. One downside of the stuttered disappearances was that students could not look to see what was already done so they could find a place for their contribution, which was part of the assignment. In any evdent, I really appreciate your creating this workspace for me and my class. Beliveau (talk) 18:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Beliveau, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Keri (talk) 11:38, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

A word

Hey Beliveau, I ran a Wikipedia assignment in one of my classes a few years ago. Allow me to give you some practical pointers, from both sides (as a teacher and an editor). It's always a good idea to get in touch with some of the people already working on the project. Have a look at Wikipedia:School and university projects--what you can do is get some practical advice, but you are also encouraged to sign up and list your projects. Doing that can also hook you up with online help: there's Online Ambassadors who help your students with technical and other stuff. Another problem that caught the attention of editors was the now-famous "flurry". In general, it's not a good idea if a bunch of editors work on the same article. It causes edit conflicts (the left hand and right hand and all--for 300 people) and raises eyebrows. Wikipedia class assignments can be a great learning experience, but often only if they are structured: small groups can work on one single article, but larger groups (bigger than three, in my experience) cannot.

We're all interested in keeping you and your students on board, and at the Education project there's plenty of folks who can help you lower the frustration level (note that again I had to lock down the article last night...frustrating for everyone), which in turn will help you as an instructor. All the best--I gotta get back to grading and giving finals. You know how it is. Drmies (talk) 15:27, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for addressing this. I spent some time at Wikipedia:School and university projects. I'll go back and see how I can sign up and start a project.I would like to make this an ongoing part of our curriculum, since it is an environment students need to be understand (and I need to understand it better as well). The "flurry" is an interesting problem, since I can see where the red flags would fly, but atomizing the process works against the crowdsourced product I was envisioning (however myopically). I asked the students to stop with the page and send me the contributions via email, so I'm sorry it has had to be locked down. We have a page that is Talk:Ways of Seeing/Proposed revisions to Ways of Seeing article where the material has been accumulated and I have a student now doing some editing/revising, since the disappearance of the submissions amplified the lefthand/righthand problem as far as duplication. I share your grading/finals/semester end pain...Beliveau (talk) 18:32, 6 December 2012 (UTC)beliveau
  • Yeah, "crowdsourcing" sounds great in theory, but in practice one has to draw a number. There's a couple of folks who are really good at setting up projects: my superhero is User:Mike Christie, who is also a gentleman with a fantastic mustache. Drmies (talk) 20:59, 6 December 2012 (UTC)