Criterion A-
In Criterion A, we were supposed to research and investigate about wikipedia/wikiality. We had to learn what they were, and how they were run, edited, posted, created, etc. We also had to evaluate the reliability of wikipedia. We especially had to focus on the editing and posting aspect of wikipedia because that's what wikipedia/wikiality was all about: people editing and refining it constantly. We also had to find the relationship and importance of wikiality/pedia in our lives and society. Then we had to site all our sources properly. Then, we had to create a method of finding inaccuracies on wikipedia with my partner Brooke. Then I had to our method by finding an inaccuracy on wikipedia by:
- finding a suspected inaccuracy
- saving and citing the suspected inaccuracy
- then research to back up our corrections with citations
- then post the evidence.
We followed the guidelines/requirements of this criterion quite well. We answered what a wiki was, who creates them, why use them, who edit them. We described the relevance of wikipedia in our lives and society, and why they are especially important for our generation. Then with Brooke, we investigated where wikipedia gets their information from. We also tried to explore in depth how wikipedia is edited, how inaccuracies are found and we investigated the reliability of Wikipedia itself. Then with Brooke, we created a method for finding inaccuracies on wikipedia. The only problem was that we answered how to correct an inaccuracy correctly, but not really on how to find one (except pure luck). Then, we explored different wikipedia sites and found an inaccuracy on the Chuck site ( A spelling error). Then we saved it, and posted it on our blogs.
We could have done a better job in this criteria if we had explored the reliability and the history/creation of wikipedia, and where they get their information from since we only went through it very lightly.
Criterion B-
In this criteria, we had to post the wikipedia section that we planned to correct on our blogs and describe the suggested change. Then we had to show our corrections on our blogs, highlighting the incorrect information we wished to correct. Then we had to cite our sources (MLA). Then we had to make a list of 3 design specifications for our final wikipedia correction.
We followed this criterion well too. We posted the section that we planned to correct, giving our suggested changes, then we gave the dictionary definition as well as all the other pertinent sites in MLA format. Then we gave our 3 design specifications.
We could have improved on this criterion by giving more design specifications. We were very limited to giving redundant design specs since our change was very minor and quite insignificant.
Criterion C-
No C
Criterion D-
In this criteria, we had to first read and sign the "wikipedia responsibility agreement" then had to get it approved by Mrs. Wilson. Then we had to make the correction on Wikipedia including correct sources.
We did sign the agreement, got approved, and made the changed. but we could not include the source in wikipedia itself since it was a spelling error.
Evaluation-
Our project was a success. We have checked to see if anyone has changed our change, but no one did. It stands proudly. As much as I hate to admit, I doubt there will be a major influence in humanity/society. I mean, a spelling editing, at maximum, would have an influence on a little child reading the article (who is not a good speller) and now knows how to spell chagrin. Another influence can be that now people understand the paragraph more profoundly, since the spelling error could have marred the intention of the article itself.
It also met all the design specifications. Our spelling correction was accurate, it was properly cited, and we also made sure of our spelling correction. So it met all the design specs.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Criterion A- investigation, Criterion B- Design
We were introduced to a new unit. It is called wikiality. We are basically paired in twos to correct a wikipedia article that has faults. That is the final goal of this project.
A wiki is the short term for wikipedia, which is an online encyclopedia. It is created by people, and can be edited by people easily too. We use them as a source of information.
Our task for this unit is to work in a group of two to correct a wikipedia article that has faults and errors in it. It is definitely important for us to learn about wikipedia because wikipedia is a popular source of information in the internet world. As society is becoming more developed, the importance of internet is incredibly rising. Since wikipedia is a popular and common site for knowledge, is it crucial that we students, who are developing in a modern society with internet, learn about wikipedia.
I will be working with Brooke as a group of two for this particular unit.
Wikipedia gets its information from the people who edit it. These people have to cite their sources where they got it from for their editing to be finalized.
Furthermore, the people themselves decide what material will go on. But when major changes occur within a page, the wikipedia personnel looks over the change and decide whether or not to confirm the change.
I think that wikipedia is very reliable. Even though it is subject to constant vandalism, the vandalism is deleted almost instantaneously. For example, just for the sake of curiosity, I tried vandalism on the wikipedia page itself, but it was changed within 10 seconds. Furthermore, I heard that the accuracy of wikipedia is the same accuracy as a printed encyclopedia, which is amazing.
Since the people are required to site their sources when editing or publishing a wikipedia page, it naturally becomes an accurate and reliable page of information. When the correct sources are not given, the editing is deleted.
To make a wiki, all you have got to do is simply sign up for the website. Then, you just create a new page and write some things in it. It is a very simple process that takes a very short time as well.
Not much material has changed in our wiki. They just edited a few sentences and changed the names, but other than that, there were no major changes. I guess our page was a target of vandalism by our fellow classmates, without a particular reason. Personally, it didn't feel so bad. However, it was a little annoying, seeing all the weird changes that were made. But because nothing was insulting or very big, I didn't find it so bad.
To delete changes or go back to an older page, all the owner of the page has to do is go to page history. When the page is loaded, there will be options under each edit saying "view changes" or "delete". Therefore, the owner simply has to click on delete, and the change will be reversed.
Wikis could be used in various ways. For example, for a group project, one can post up a rough draft of a script, per say, and ask for their partner to look and go over it. So the partner can just edit the page to improve it, and so it can be used to do a group project without physically seeing each other, but having a better way of changing it better than IM, MSN, etc.
Another way it can be used is for an online encyclopedia, like Wikipedia itself. One can post one's knowledge and other people can constantly edit it.
It can be used for the purpose of facebook. where they leave posts and comments for each other. However, the probability is that it won't be used because other people might edit it in a bad way, like vandalism.
Also, it can be used for advertisements, surveys, a support group, a page for debate. Etc.
When there is a dispute between editors on whether a particular bit of information should or should not be included in an article, there is a process for deciding. First, one addresses the dispute on the talk page of that article asking other opinions of other editors or Wikipedia's dispute-resolving process. Then, they may either vote or dictate the way the editing will become.
How to find inaccuracies on Wikipedia:
1. Research the topic of the article title
2. Compare your answers with the Wikipedia entry
3. verify/Find out if there is anything that does not correspond
4. If there is something that does not corresponds, verify the validity of your research resource
5. If your research/resource is valid, then the Wikipedia entry has a fault and an inaccuracy
Bibliography:
"Wikipedia: About" Wikipedia: The Free Online Encyclopedia. 10 Feb. 2010. 8 Feb. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About>
Despite the effectiveness of our method, we did not use it to find the suspected inaccuracy. We were just exploring different Wikipedia pages and then we found a spelling error as shown below:
"As of Season 3, Chuck has willingly decided to become a real spy, to Sarah's chagin."
the correct spelling for the word "chagin" is chagrin.
"Chagrin Definition: n. A keen feeling of mental unease, as of annoyance or embarrassment, caused by failure, disappointment, or a disconcerting event: To her chagrin, the party ended just as she arrived."
and there were no dictionary results for "chagin" except a Russian person in dictionary.com. Therefore, this was definitely a spelling error.
Bibliography-
"Chuck (TV series)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 15 Feb. 2010. Web. 17 Feb. 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_%28TV_series%29.
"Chagrin." Dictionary.com. 17 Feb. 2010. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chagrin
Design specifications:
1. It needs to be accurate
2. It needs to be properly cited
3. We will make sure of the spelling using the online dictionary
A wiki is the short term for wikipedia, which is an online encyclopedia. It is created by people, and can be edited by people easily too. We use them as a source of information.
Our task for this unit is to work in a group of two to correct a wikipedia article that has faults and errors in it. It is definitely important for us to learn about wikipedia because wikipedia is a popular source of information in the internet world. As society is becoming more developed, the importance of internet is incredibly rising. Since wikipedia is a popular and common site for knowledge, is it crucial that we students, who are developing in a modern society with internet, learn about wikipedia.
I will be working with Brooke as a group of two for this particular unit.
Wikipedia gets its information from the people who edit it. These people have to cite their sources where they got it from for their editing to be finalized.
Furthermore, the people themselves decide what material will go on. But when major changes occur within a page, the wikipedia personnel looks over the change and decide whether or not to confirm the change.
I think that wikipedia is very reliable. Even though it is subject to constant vandalism, the vandalism is deleted almost instantaneously. For example, just for the sake of curiosity, I tried vandalism on the wikipedia page itself, but it was changed within 10 seconds. Furthermore, I heard that the accuracy of wikipedia is the same accuracy as a printed encyclopedia, which is amazing.
Since the people are required to site their sources when editing or publishing a wikipedia page, it naturally becomes an accurate and reliable page of information. When the correct sources are not given, the editing is deleted.
To make a wiki, all you have got to do is simply sign up for the website. Then, you just create a new page and write some things in it. It is a very simple process that takes a very short time as well.
Not much material has changed in our wiki. They just edited a few sentences and changed the names, but other than that, there were no major changes. I guess our page was a target of vandalism by our fellow classmates, without a particular reason. Personally, it didn't feel so bad. However, it was a little annoying, seeing all the weird changes that were made. But because nothing was insulting or very big, I didn't find it so bad.
To delete changes or go back to an older page, all the owner of the page has to do is go to page history. When the page is loaded, there will be options under each edit saying "view changes" or "delete". Therefore, the owner simply has to click on delete, and the change will be reversed.
Wikis could be used in various ways. For example, for a group project, one can post up a rough draft of a script, per say, and ask for their partner to look and go over it. So the partner can just edit the page to improve it, and so it can be used to do a group project without physically seeing each other, but having a better way of changing it better than IM, MSN, etc.
Another way it can be used is for an online encyclopedia, like Wikipedia itself. One can post one's knowledge and other people can constantly edit it.
It can be used for the purpose of facebook. where they leave posts and comments for each other. However, the probability is that it won't be used because other people might edit it in a bad way, like vandalism.
Also, it can be used for advertisements, surveys, a support group, a page for debate. Etc.
When there is a dispute between editors on whether a particular bit of information should or should not be included in an article, there is a process for deciding. First, one addresses the dispute on the talk page of that article asking other opinions of other editors or Wikipedia's dispute-resolving process. Then, they may either vote or dictate the way the editing will become.
How to find inaccuracies on Wikipedia:
1. Research the topic of the article title
2. Compare your answers with the Wikipedia entry
3. verify/Find out if there is anything that does not correspond
4. If there is something that does not corresponds, verify the validity of your research resource
5. If your research/resource is valid, then the Wikipedia entry has a fault and an inaccuracy
Bibliography:
"Wikipedia: About" Wikipedia: The Free Online Encyclopedia. 10 Feb. 2010. 8 Feb. 2010. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:About>
Despite the effectiveness of our method, we did not use it to find the suspected inaccuracy. We were just exploring different Wikipedia pages and then we found a spelling error as shown below:
"As of Season 3, Chuck has willingly decided to become a real spy, to Sarah's chagin."
the correct spelling for the word "chagin" is chagrin.
"Chagrin Definition: n. A keen feeling of mental unease, as of annoyance or embarrassment, caused by failure, disappointment, or a disconcerting event: To her chagrin, the party ended just as she arrived."
and there were no dictionary results for "chagin" except a Russian person in dictionary.com. Therefore, this was definitely a spelling error.
Bibliography-
"Chuck (TV series)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 15 Feb. 2010. Web. 17 Feb. 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_%28TV_series%29.
"Chagrin." Dictionary.com. 17 Feb. 2010. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chagrin
Design specifications:
1. It needs to be accurate
2. It needs to be properly cited
3. We will make sure of the spelling using the online dictionary
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)