User:Chrisgonz321/sandbox

Hello! Welcome to my sandbox, where there is no sand. I'm not entirely sure why you're reading this. It's a mostly uneventful commentary that is nevertheless necessary to complete the introductory Wikipedia exercises. So it goes.

Week 2 Assignment:

Content gaps, as the name implies, occur when Wikipedia articles do not have as much information as one would expect on a certain topic. This is especially relevant in articles for which a vast literature exists; in such instances, there should be a proportionally large amount of entries on its Wikipedia page.

Content gaps may occur because of author bias. Authors could, for example, omit from a Wikipedia page information that undermines their own prejudices or ideology. In such cases, careful attention must to biases so as to remedy the content gap.

To some extent, it does matter who writes on Wikipedia. I have seen some brilliantly-written articles and been very impressed. I have also read some truly dreadful articles. Authors are not created equal in terms of their writing quality and preparation. Nevertheless, Wikipedia was created to be inclusive, and the editor system alleviates the problem alluded to in the earlier sentences of this paragraph. With the aid of various editors, Wiki pages adhere to a fairly high standard in terms of quality.

To be unbiased on Wikipedia one must present all viewpoints fairly, taking caution against over-representing or under-representing sides of the debate. This does not much differ from my own definition of bias; in all cases, I think everyone with a meaningful contribution to make to a debate, scholarly or otherwise, should be listened to.

Week 4 Assignment:

• Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information. Why?

Blog posts are typically poor sources of reliable information because there is no mechanism to filter and review content before it is posted on to a blog. Bloggers only have to surpass the process of creating their blog before they are allowed to put out whatever information they produce, regardless of accuracy. Blog posts are not peer reviewed and often do not even cite the sources from which they pull information. Moreover, bloggers need not have any sort of credentials (i.e. degrees, work in the field, or otherwise relevant experience) before posting.

Blogs can thus be considered unreliable for the two following reasons: authors often have no formal qualifications to write on the given matter, and the content they produce is not subjected to the sort of peer criticism that is normally required.

Press releases may be unreliable sources of information because their authors may be biased towards, well, themselves. Let's take, for example, a food company that has just been caught using illegal chemicals in its processing. If this same food company decides to issue a press release on why their additives were in fact legal, it would be wise to be skeptical of their findings. The company has an enormous conflict of interest; surely, they have an incentive to try and make their activities appear as positive as possible. We should therefore be wary of press release authorship and potential conflicts of interest therein.

• What are some reasons you might not want to use a company's website as the main source of information about that company?

Companies are locked in a bitter struggle to sell their products to us, the consumers. For that reason they have an incentive to make themselves appear as good as possible; to succeed, companies must also make their products look amazing. Already this conflict of interest -- between a company's incentive to tell the truth about itself and to make itself seem desirable for consumer business -- should make us wary of taking for truth the information on their website.

There is also a further problem: it is highly unlikely for a company to publish either 1) the information of competitors or 2) criticism that has been levied against it. This inherently makes it such that reading only the company's website will leave us with incomplete information. If we limited ourselves only to that source, we would remain unaware of potentially better places to do business and of any problems the company may have been associated with in the past.

• What is the difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism?

A copyright violation occurs when someone uses the work of another person which has the legal protection of a copyright. To use copyrighted material one must ask for permission and usually pay a fee. Failure to do this is punishable by law. .

Plagiarism occurs when someone takes the work of another person and attempts to pass it off as one's own. While plagiarism and copyright violations may overlap, this is not necessarily the case. Trying to pass off the work of another as your own is plagiarism, but if that original work is not copyrighted then the action is not illegal. Nevertheless, plagiarism is a serious offense that usually results in punitive academic penalties from schools or universities.

The difference, therefore, is that copyright violations are illegal and specific; plagiarism occurs when one does not give proper credit to the work of another but it is not necessarily illegal. They are similar in that both ought to be avoided, though!

• What are some good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism?

I never really have a problem "close paraphrasing" or plagiarism because both of them are entirely opposed to the whole academic endeavor. The whole purpose or scholarly research is to increase humanity's knowledge. To do this, scholars spend countless hours researching primary documents, critiquing work of their contemporaries, reading prior commentary, etc. It is thus unconscionable to steal from another author and take credit for the work that she put into producing her findings.

To avoid plagiarism, I usually take minimalist notes on the content I read. That does not mean I take a small amount of notes; rather, I write down the main ideas of the passage. The primary concepts, in other words. I then proceed to fill the necessary details to support those big ideas. Finally, after digesting the information and putting it into terms my brain can understand, I re-write what the original author was attempting to convey. The information has thereby been processed but reproduced in an original way, my own. And of course, at that point I have to return so as to cite the specific passages and pages from which I took the information, making it clear that the ideas presented are not my own.

Further Questions Week Four:

For each link, give an explanation for why you have chosen that topic. Is there very little information on the Wikipedia page, thus a big opportunity for you to add information? Have you already found research on the topic? For articles that already exist, check the Talk page to see what other Wikipedians might be doing. Is it an active page? When was the last post?

Étienne Polverel

Etienne Polverel is my character, and thus the first article to which I'd like to add. The information on his character page is rather scanty; there's a lot of material I could add to it. The same is true of his talk page: nobody has posted on it for a few years and the place is deserted.

I have already found a terrific book on the subject by a scholar named Jeremy Popkin. I have even gotten in contact with the author, and since he responded to my email in a timely manner I know he will be helpful as I continue researching Polverel's life. Unfortunately, though, his book seems to be one of the few sources that deal with Etienne Polverel in English; there is a biography about the man but it is written in French. The article will not be as strong because I will be relying so heavily on that one source. In order to counter this deficiency, though, I plan on adding some information about the situation in Haiti at the time so as to properly contextualize Polverel's actions. With this approach I feel confident on being able to improve the article.

Some relevant Info: Popkin's book, which I am presently reading, discusses in tremendous detail Polverel's attitudes toward slavery, his career before being sent to Saint-Domingue, the actions he undertook therein, and much more. I have not yet arrived at those parts of the book and so cannot offer much commentary. Nevertheless, I have gained an understanding of the underlying contradictions in Saint-Domingue's slave system. It was these contradictions that would lead to the eventual Revolution. Interestingly, however, I have discovered that the Revolution was not the result of a revolt by the black population against the white majority. Instead, the Revolution was the combination of a revolt by the free blacks against the whites (who refused to confer upon them equal rights) and a simultaneous, though unrelated, revolt by black slaves against their masters. This adds a lot of nuance which I am eager to investigate.

Haitian Revolution

This page is a bit more active; there has been some discussion in the Talk page within the past few months. This topic is a bit different as it is a famous Revolution and there's much information out there for me to add.

The Wiki page is rather disorganized: to take just one example, there are two separate subheadings named "impact" regarding the legacy and effects of the Haitian Revolution. This can evidently be streamlined and improved. But in addition to making plenty of stylistic changes, I could also expand on some of the subheadings that don't have much material; the part that discusses the tensions between white Haitians and freed black Haitians is barely developed. The article is also in need of plenty more citations.

Finally, I have already found some good research material on the subject. The aforementioned book by Popkin discusses the Haitian Revolution in detail, but I have also found a book about "Black Jacobins" (namely, free black radicals) and another one named Universal Emancipation which talks about the Revolution. Sources on this topic abound.

Week 5 Assignment

• In your sandbox, write a few sentences about what you plan to contribute to the selected article.

As I have mentioned above, I hope to add copious amounts of information to Etienne Polverel's page. The index of the book I have states that the following information is to be found inside: Polverel's attitude toward slavery, his career before going to Saint-Domingue, conflicts he had with Sonthonax, how he handled the crises of June 20th, 1793, among others. All of these are relevant and interesting tidbits to add.

As for the Haitian Revolution article, I can expound on the conflicts between white plantation owners in Saint-Domingue and the free black population, which demanded equality for itself, not freedom for the slaves. I can also talk about how the radical Jacobin ideology influenced the liberation movements in the colony.

• 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.

See above. These ideas shall be posted to the Talk page as well.

• 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.

You Are All Free: The Haitian Revolution and the Abolition of Slavery by Jeremy Popkin, Confronting Black Jacobins : the U.S., the Haitian Revolution, and the origins of the Dominican Republic by Gerald Horne, The Black Jacobins; : Toussaint L'Ouverture and the San Domingo Revolution by James, CLR, Universal Emancipation: The Haitian Revolution and the Radical Enlightenment by Nick Nesbitt.

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.

I have already mentioned what I plan on adding to both my articles; kindly see the my responses to bullet point one, as well as my replies to the last question from last week's exercise. To reiterate, though, I will just mention that I plan on fleshing out Etienne Polverel's life in his article, as well as writing more about free black-white tensions in Saint-Domingue prior to the revolution.

Article Outline

Polverel's Life and Background

Etienne Polverel came from a wealthy, aristocratic background. By profession he was a lawyer. Polverel was a also Freemason and a member of the Jacobin Club. Some of the members in his Masonic lodge in Bordeaux were free blacks from Saint-Domingue, so he had early contacts with them before being sent to the colony on September 17, 1792.

Polverel was sent to Saint-Domingue along with Leger Felicite Sonthonax to enforce a law passed on April 4th, 1792, which decreed that free blacks and whites in the colony were to have equal rights. Jacques Pierre Brissot, a prominent abolitionist at the time, lobbied for them to be sent and ensured that they were. The rights that were then denied to free blacks were the franchise and the right to hold office in the Colonial Assembly (the legislative body that ran internal affairs in the colony). The Assembly was at the time run only by whites. About 10,000 French troops went with Polverel and Sonthonax to help enforce the April 4th decree.

In 1795, after issuing emancipation proclamations in Saint-Domingue, Polverel was recalled to France. The National Convention had passed its own abolition of slavery, which vindicated Polverel and Sonthonax. However, plantation owners in France were furious with Polverel for having done so, so they put him on trial once he returned to France. The Committee of Public Safety deliberated for a few months on what to do about Sonthonax and Polverel, but Polverel got sick and died before a verdict on his fate was reached.

Views on Slavery and the Revolution in France

Like many Jacobins, Polverel was a fervent supporter of the Revolution and its ideals. He was also a nationalist. Polverel was primarily committed to upholding the laws of the French assembly. In the Jacobin view, those who dissented from passed laws were not in the opposition, they were counter-revolutionaries to be dealt with harshly. Polverel seemed to have agreed with this view.

Following the French Revolution in 1789, Polverel began contributing to radical newspapers where he published articles against slavery. So ardent was his opposition to slavery that on one occasion he attempted to remove some pro-slavery members of the Jacobin club because of their views. The Revolution, thought Polverel, had no room for pro-slavery sentiments.

Despite his personal opposition to slavery, though, Polverel put the laws of the France first. When he and Sonthonax arrived in Saint-Domingue, one of their first acts was to issue a proclamation declaring that they had arrived to save slavery, not abolish it.

Situation in Saint-Domingue Prior to Polverel's Arrival

Saint-Domingue was probably the wealthiest colony in the world up until 1789. Rich whites held the best land, and mostly used it to grow sugar. Less profitable land was used to grow coffee, and both free blacks and whites owned coffee plantations. Coffee and sugar plantations produced tremendous wealth for France and its colonies, but the slave-laborers could not enjoy the fruits of their labor because they had few, if any, rights.

The Haitian Revolution of 1790 did not begin merely as a slave uprising. Instead, it was the combined result of two simultaneous though unrelated revolts.First, the free blacks of Saint-Domingue began an armed rebellion to gain equal rights with the white settlers. Although free blacks and colonial whites mingled and had generally decent relations, the whites held on to all political power and were willing to use violence to maintain it. The problem of the white colonists had to be settled before the matter of slavery. But even the whites were not totally unified: poor whites resented the wealth and influence of the rich plantation owners, and the wealthy were fearful of having their property stolen.

Second, the slaves revolted for various reasons. Some wanted to gain their immediate freedom, others fought for improved conditions on the plantations. For example, some slaves had heard that King Louis XVI was going to allow them to freely work for three days out of the week. While the truth of this statement from the King was disputed, it nevertheless encouraged some slaves to join the revolt so as to gain the rights allegedly promised to them.

The situation in the colony was therefore extremely precarious and needed careful handling.

Polverel's Actions Leading to the Abolition of Slavery

When Sonthonax and Polverel first arrived in Saint-Domingue, they were met with hostility by the white settlers. Beacause the whites feared that Polverel came to abolish slavery, few of them supported the civil commissioners' mission, so Polverel turned to the free blacks for support. The free blacks proved to be the only reliable group that Poverel could ally with.

On May 5th, 1793, Polverel issued a proclamation which demanded enforcement of the Code Noir. The Code Noir was a series of laws which stated that slaves must be treated with respect and not abused. Although passed in 1685, the Code Noir was never respected by the white colonists, who routinely abused the slaves. Polverel's proclamation on May 5th stated that slaves must be given basic provisions and small plots of land for them to manage. To ensure enforcement, the proclamation was translated to Creole and read aloud on all slave plantations. This would ensure that slaves would become aware of their new protections.

Shortly after the proclamation was issued, a new governor arrived in Le Cap, Saint-Domingue. His name was Francois-Thomas Galbaud du Fort. He owned property in the colony and hoped to preserve the slave system. For these reasons, he distrusted and even hated Polverel and Sonthonax. Galbaud even insulted the civil commissioners, and his pro-slavery rhetoric was supported by many of Le Cap's whites. Sonthonax and Polverel returned to Le Cap (they were in different regions of Saint-Domingue) and imprisoned Galbaud in a ship because of his defiant behavior.

Galbaud, however, enjoyed support from the sailors then anchored near the ship and from other whites in the city. On June 20, 1793, Galbaud managed to escape and attack Le Cap, aiming to capture Sonthonax and Polverel. The commissioners, massively outnumbered, escaped to the outskirts of the city. Galbaud's followers rampaged through the city, and fires burnt much of it to the ground. To recapture the city, Polverel and Sonthonax issued a statement saying that all blacks who would join them and fight against Galbaud would be granted French citizenship. Some of the slaves who were revolting answered their call, as did many freed blacks. Some white troops also remained loyal to Polverel. With the combined efforts of these three groups, Polverel returned to Le Cap, defeated Galbaud, and took control of the city.

By this time, Spain and Britain had declared war on France. Both of these empires wanted Saint-Domingue, especially Spain, which had a colony on the same island. To combat the French and Spanish threat, Polverel needed to gather even more support to preserve French rule in Saint-Domingue. In August of 1793, Polverel and Sonthonax issued general emancipation for all blacks born in France's colonies, including for their families. Polverel followed that proclamation with another in October, which stated that all blacks were to be French citizens and enjoy full and complete equality. Following emancipation, though, Polverel hoped to provide one more incentive for the blacks to fight for the French Republic. He therefore decreed that blacks were to be given exclusive rights over land in a year's time. He also passed other laws on post-slave labor, including a requirement that freed slaves continue to work on their plantations for one year following the decree. This finally won over the remaining blacks who were not loyal to the Republican government, and they joined together to repel the incoming British and Spanish troops. The blacks of Haiti were not just freed but legally equal to whites.

Suggestions for further reading

There exists a biography of Etienne Polverel, but it is only available in French. The sources cited in the reference page, however, all mention his role in the abolition of slavery in Haiti.

*Note: all of the material seen here in my sandbox is the product of my own research; the overwhelming majority of it was not on the Wikipedia page previously.

Week 6 Questions

• What do you think of Wikipedia's definition of "neutrality"?

I think Wikipedia's definition of neutrality excellent; it is necessary and proper. Wikipedia is not an editorial page or a site for the opinions of its editors to be expressed. As the guidelines indicate, Wikipedia is a place for people to become informed on the facts of certain issues, not a site for persuasion. This cannot be accomplished without a clear mandate to remain neutral when presenting information.

I also enthusiastically approve of how Wikipedia encourages editors to present various points of view on controversial subjects. I believe one of the best ways to learn is by considering all the different positions and deciding which side makes the strongest case. Taking such an approach provides a balanced and comprehensive view of issues, rather than one that is overly narrow or parochial. Kudos to Wikipedia for this.

• What are the impacts and limits of Wikipedia as a source of information?

Wikipedia's impact as a source of information is formidable. I would be willing to wager that there's hardly a person with Internet access who has still to look something up on Wikipedia. The fact that the website is free and so easy to access is even better as the information can reach any person with an Internet connection. Furthermore, Wikipedia's range and breadth of information is truly astounding; sometimes, even the most obscure people and events will still have brief Wiki entries that will acquaint the reader with the basics. And of course, the site's been a source of immeasurable aid to students conducting research projects in high school and college.

The limits of Wikipedia are inevitably related to its human component. Most, if not all, Wiki-editors are people who are not experts on the subject about which they're writing. Indeed, some Wiki editors are just college students trying to pass their class. Thus, the information they provide will lack the touch and knowledge of a scholar, however well-researched the Wikipedian may be. This does not mean Wikipedia's information is worthless; it simply implies that it is an insufficient source of information if serious research is required.

• On Wikipedia, all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources. What kinds of sources does this exclude? Can you think of any problems that might create?

Wikipedia's minimum standards for reference exclude blogs, small publications, and all commentary that is not published by a reputable organization. I really do not see this policy as causing any real problems. As it is, Wikipedia allows any human being to contribute to its pages, provided that he do his proper research and cite accordingly. Allowing these same authors to cite whomever or whatever they please would cause utter chaos. There has to be at least some method to legitimate the information on Wikipedia, and Wiki's policy on standards for citations is just that method. The policy is sensible, fair, and appropriate.

• If Wikipedia was written 100 years ago, how might its content (and contributors) be different? What about 100 years from now?

I don't think Wikipedia could have existed 100 years ago, even if computers were widely available to the populace, which of course they weren't. There was an insurmountable problem at the turn of the century: 76% of the population worldwide was illiterate at that time. Even by 1940, thirty years later, over half of the U.S. population had no education past the eighth grade; further, only 6% of males and 4% of females had received a university education. Education in 1917 was extremely concentrated in the hands of very few people because most jobs did not require learning, as we know from the nature of industrial employment. Millions of people throughout the world were also contributing to waging the Great War either as soldiers or as workers at home. The pool of potential editors to the Wikipedia of 1917 would have been minuscule. Those contributors would also have been overwhelmingly white, male, and from Western countries, namely the U.S. and the U.K., and maybe France. (Russia, China, and most of the "Orient" was at this time mired in unbelievable poverty.) The content, if it could be produced, would have been extremely limited in scope because of the unavailability of research.

Turning to the future, then. I think Wikipedia will generally be better 100 years from now. Technology and expanded access to education worldwide is going to create an enormous pool of potential editors to the site. (Incidentally, this development will probably create more professors willing to assign Wiki-projects to their students.) The availability of information will exponentially increase in the next century. As developing countries continue taking steps forward, their inhabitants will become more engaged and thus add copious information to Wikipedia in their own languages. I suspect that this will be especially true, and not too long from now, of large and powerful developing countries like Brazil, Turkey, and China. Exciting times loom ahead for those who thirst for knowledge.