User:Gryllida/t/Training/Students

We can't wait to see what you'll share.

If you are part of a course that involves contributing to Wikipedia, you've come to the right place. After completing this orientation, you'll be ready to help build the world's knowledge by contributing your own expertise to Wikipedia.

Please press the forward arrow below to go on to the next page.

1 Core: The core policies and guidelines that govern content development on Wikipedia.

2 Editing: The technical skills you'll need to edit Wikipedia. You will also be introduced to the Wikipedia Community: a vital part of your editing experience.

Here's how this orientation works.

Menu Tab
Click on "Menu" at the top of the page, and you'll see links to all of the pages in this training. You can click "back" on your browser to return to where you were.

Forward and Backward
The arrows at the bottom of the page will allow you to move forward and backward through your module, and will take you to the next step in the sequence.

Links
We've intentionally limited the number of links that will take you out of the modules, just to keep things simple. Most of these links will be found under the Resources tab.

NOTE: If you click on a link you will be taken away from the orientation. If possible, open all links in new browser tabs so you can return to the training when you're ready! Otherwise, you will need to use the back button on your web browser.

We hope the material found in this orientation will provide you with practical information to help you get started on Wikipedia. We also hope that this will help you find your own place in the Wikipedia community. This is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and the way it gets better is from people like you editing to improve it.

When you complete all modules of the training, we'll ask you to push a few buttons and (optionally) leave some brief feedback for us, using your Wikipedia username. Make sure you finish the steps at the end to receive credit from your instructor for completing the training!

This module will provide a basic overview of Wikipedia’s core policies and guidelines.

When you finish, you should be able to answer:

These five guiding principles are key to how Wikipedia works.

Wikipedia's Five Pillars:

1. Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia
2. Wikipedia has a neutral point of view
3. Wikipedia is free content
4. Wikipedians should interact in a respectful and civil manner
5. Wikipedia does not have firm rules

Beyond the five pillars, there are a few more important policies and guidelines to keep in mind. First:

Verifiability

Notability

Is the subject of the article you want to work on notable enough for an encyclopedia? This guideline helps to clarify the notability question. In some cases, you may need to justify to other Wikipedians why the article topic is notable and should remain in Wikipedia. Coverage in published, reliable, secondary sources that are entirely independent of the subject, and which treat the subject in substantive detail is the key to notability.

Thousands of new Wikipedia articles are started every day. Volunteer Wikipedia editors work hard to review each of these pages to determine whether they are appropriate for an encyclopedia. Notability is one of the key criteria for their decisions.

No original research

Typical academic writing requires students to do original research, have a point of view, and argue it. Wikipedia, however, is a tertiary source of information—based on a collection of secondary sources writing about a primary source.

Simply put, Wikipedia is not a place to publish original research, but rather is a summary of what has been written in reliable sources about the original topic or research.

Check out Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines.

In the next module you’ll learn how to edit Wikipedia.

— Joseph Lapka, San Francisco State University

A user sandbox is a personal wiki page(s) where you can experiment, practice editing, plan out articles, or begin drafting articles before moving them into the article "mainspace” on Wikipedia—where live articles are read and edited.

To go to your default sandbox page, simply click the Sandbox link, which can be found at the top right whenever you are logged in.

When you start to revise larger chunks of an existing article, it's a good idea to draft your first significant edits into a sandbox. Don't copy the whole article, just choose the small piece you want to work with. Note though, that when you do so you must provide copyright attribution in your edit summary, by stating the copying taking place and wikilinking the source of the copying. A model edit summary: "Copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution."

Trying to rewrite an entire article in a sandbox can be annoying to editors who work on that article. Other editors will keep making good edits or expansions to that article while you are revising an old version in parallel in your sandbox; if you just copy and paste the whole article from your sandbox sometime later, you will undo all of those edits! Focus on small chunks of the text you want to edit instead.

It's polite to use the talk page of the article to link to your sandbox when you are ready to copy things over. That way editors can see what you're up to, and post suggestions to the talk page before you start. Once you are happy with your sandbox draft, you can place another notice on the talk page of the article with a link to the sandbox, explaining what you've done and asking for comments on it once you've added it to the main page.

For expanding a short article that doesn't provide encyclopedic coverage (known as a stub), beginning from a sandbox can be helpful. Here you can write and rewrite before going "live."

Small articles that are expanded by a factor of five within a short period (and are well-referenced) are also eligible as "Did You Know" entries (a section on the Main page); working in a sandbox until reaching that threshold may be a good idea.

For starting a new article, you may first want to draft the article in a user sandbox named after the topic, such as

just as you would when expanding an existing article. Work on it until it meets the basics requirements for new articles: it should be based on significant coverage of the topic, in reliable sources that are independent of the topic.

When you are ready to make it live on Wikipedia, try asking an experienced editor you've encountered to look it over and see if it meets the basic requirements for new articles. One way is to submit the article to the Articles for creation project. To do this, copy, paste and save this code at the top of the draft article: {{subst:submit}}

Articles can however, be moved directly to the article mainspace. Click the Move tab, then move it out of your sandbox to its final title. Note that if the page has problems from the perspective of experienced users, it is far more likely that the page will be nominated for deletion if you move it yourself, without having it checked first.

So, you've drafted something in a sandbox and moved it into the mainspace. How do you know when other editors have a suggestion?

A personal watchlist is an easy way to keep track of all the pages to which you are contributing. You can use your watchlist to monitor article changes, conversations and editor collaboration.

When you add an article to your watchlist, you also watch the corresponding Talk page, so if someone responds to your article edits on the Talk page, it will show up on your watchlist.

You'll want to know when someone has offered advice on your article or edits, or you may see your work disappear! You can set your email preferences to receive email whenever pages on your watchlist are changed.

Consensus is the main way decisions are made on Wikipedia, both in terms of article content and how Wikipedia itself is run. It's not a matter of voting, and nobody is in charge over a final say.

Instead, the consensus view on Wikipedia represents the facts that even opposing sides agree are relevant. Wikipedia's concept of consensus doesn't necessarily mean that everyone agrees, but it involves an effort to incorporate all editors' legitimate concerns, while respecting Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

When disagreements occur, we resolve them through discussion—usually on the relevant Talk page. Since Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view—fairly describing significant viewpoints on a subject without endorsing any of them—it is almost always possible to reach consensus about article content, even if editors themselves have fundamentally different points of view on the subject.

The ideal Wikipedia article on a controversial topic is one where partisans on both sides would read it and say, "my viewpoint is described accurately".

The Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle is one good way to think about the consensus editing process.

1 Be Bold: If you think you can make an article better, but you aren't sure whether others will disagree with the changes you want to make, you should start by boldly editing as you think best, making sure to cite source that verify any information additions.

2 Revert: If your edit gets reverted by another editor, that's okay! You've simply met an editor with a different view about the article. This is your chance to see Wikipedia's consensus model in action. Check the edit summaries and the Talk page to see why the other editor reverted your edit. (Do not simply make your edit again; that's not building consensus, that's the beginning of an edit war: It's actually seen as very aggressive, and could get you temporarily blocked!)

3 Discuss: Start a discussion on the Talk page (if the other editor has not done so already) — politely! After all, you both want to improve Wikipedia. Explain why you made the edit. Work with the other editor(s) to develop a consensus. Be confident, but listen and consider all objections. When you've found some common ground, you can make more edits.

For productive discussions, remember to:

• Assume good faith: Wikipedia, being on the internet, is often a place for misunderstanding tone. Always assume other editors are trying to improve the project, mean well, and aren't being deliberately rude.
• Likewise, try to be your best self in responding to feedback: don't get defensive or angry. Whenever an edit is challenged, it has nothing to do with you as a person, and everything to do with improving Wikipedia. Be polite, and discuss article content rather than editors. Never make personal attacks, even in retaliation.
• Read messages people have left on the talk pages of articles you are editing. There may be a concern that will change the way you see your own plan to edit. Try to respond quickly, ideally within a few hours.
• Remember to keep an eye on the Watchlist for the pages you edit. (Did you set up email notifications in your preferences? You should!)

This training has prepared you to contribute to Wikipedia. But you'll keep learning as you keep editing and mastering the skills you need to build up a history of top-quality contributions to Wikipedia. You can find a variety of written help materials and additional videos in the Resources tab above.

If you need help, here are some resources you can bookmark or download:

Materials for self-study

• Help:Contents is the main help page that will guide you in the right direction. The help page may be reached at any time by clicking help displayed under the ► Interaction tab on the left side of all pages.
• Help:Contents/Directory is a descriptive listing of all Wikipedia's informative, instructional and consultation pages.
• Editing Wikipedia is a guide to editing basics.
• Evaluating Wikipedia can help you learn what makes a good or bad Wikipedia article.
• There are handy reference sheets on using talk pages and avoiding plagiarism.
• You may wish to bookmark or print out a copy of the editing cheatsheet for a quick reference on wiki syntax.

Community help

• The Teahouse, a place for new editors to introduce themselves, asks questions, and find support from other editors.
• The Help desk, where you can ask questions about how to use and edit Wikipedia.
• If you place {{Help me}} (including the curly brackets) then your question on your talk page, a volunteer will visit you there!
• The help channel for live chat help from other Wikipedians.

This module goes into more detail on some of the trickier aspects of writing for Wikipedia and some common pitfalls for students doing Wikipedia assignments

By the end of this section, you should be able to answer:

• How do I choose the right article to work on?
• What is expected from a good Wikipedia article?
• How can I get an article on Wikipedia's Main Page?
• How can I get feedback on my article?

Choosing the right first article to work on—and finding the right title for it, if it's a new article—can make a big difference.

Here are a few guidelines for the kinds of articles that may be appropriate to start out on, and what kinds of articles to avoid. These guidelines were created based on feedback and experiences of professors, students and Wikipedians.

Getting your new article to appear on the Main Page of Wikipedia as a "Did you know" entry is a great first goal, as soon as you move out of a sandbox. To be eligible, an article must:

• conform to Wikipedia's core policies regarding verifiability, neutral point of view, and copyright;
• have been created (or expanded five-fold) within the last seven days;
• be about 3 or 4 paragraphs long, at the least;
• be supported with citations to reliable sources.

The checklist for a perfect article starts out simply enough:

• Fills a gap
• Has a great title
• Starts with a clear description of the subject

...

But it's a long list. And the last thing on it is...

...

• May not be attainable.

So don't worry about making your article perfect. Take it one step at a time.

Wikipedia articles usually start humbly, developing and improving gradually over time — even when they are largely written by just one or a few contributors.

Typically, you start by making a stub, just a paragraph or two that serves to identify the topic, with enough sourcing to assure readers that it ought to have its own article. As you expand the article — perhaps nominating it for DYK along the way — you divide it into sections on different aspects of the topic.

Once the article is relatively comprehensive — at least touching on the major aspects of the topic — you should get some advice from other editors. After incorporating that feedback, if you think it meets the Good article criteria, you can nominate it for Good article status, working with the reviewer(s) to fix any major shortcomings.

After more polish and more research to cover every significant aspect of the topic, you can attempt the Featured article process. If, by the end, the article meets the more stringent Featured article criteria, then the article will be eligible to have its day on Wikipedia's Main Page, where it draws the attention of tens of thousands of readers.

There is much more help material available on Wikipedia, much of it specialized for very specific types of articles or specific editing tasks. Here are a few help pages that are particularly relevant to students working on Wikipedia:

• How to edit medical topics — Medical topics have particularly stringent rules for the proper use of sources, so if you're going to work on medicine-related articles (including psychology), this is a helpful primer. You can also read a pdf primer on editing medical topics, or for editing in psychology or sociology.
• Citing books — If you're working primarily from books as your sources, citing different pages at different points in the article, this guide shows how you can format the citations. We also have a .pdf you can use as a reference.
• Here are some helpful do's and don't's for choosing an article.
• Module 5: Background — If you want to learn more about Wikipedia and its history, you can check out the optional fifth module of this orientation.

Click the image to go to the video on YouTube. You will need to press 'back' on your browser to return to this module.

Click the image to go to the video on YouTube. You will need to press 'back' on your browser to return to this module.