User:Eryk (Wiki Ed)/Sociology Handout

Note from Eryk: Thanks for being willing to provide input on the sociology handout! Please leave any comments on the talk page or send to me via email at erykwikiedu.org.

About this handout

What is it?

This handout will be a single large-sheet, front and back handout, folded in half so it forms four pages of content. It will focus specifically on how student editors in the Wikipedia Education Program in the United States and Canada can contribute successfully to sociology articles on the English Wikipedia. This will be the third of several discipline-specific handouts the Wiki Education Foundation produces, and it will be distributed in printed copies to all students in the sociology area who are participating in our program beginning in the Spring 2015 term.

Why Sociology?

The American Sociological Association's Wikipedia Initiative encourages professors in the United States and Canada to have their students contribute content to the sociology area on Wikipedia. Many of these professors do so by participating in the Wikipedia Education Program in the United States and Canada.

What do student editors already know?

Student editors in our program are encouraged to go through the online training and read the Editing Wikipedia brochure.

What do instructors already know?

We provide guidance for instructors in the form of an online training, brochures, and assignment design consulting.

Why not just link to <any number of existing resources>?

Our student surveys show that the single resource they use most is printed guidance — that they won’t necessarily click that link you gave them, but if they have a physical handout on their desk next to them while they work, they will use it. So we’re creating a physical printed resource that’s aimed specifically at student editors, with the most common challenges they face.

Page 1: Editing Wikipedia articles on Sociology

Editing Wikipedia can be daunting for newbies, especially as a student editor contributing to Wikipedia for the first time as a class assignment. This guide is designed to assist students assigned to add sociology content to articles on Wikipedia. Here’s what other sociology editors will expect you to know.

Be accurate

You’re editing a resource millions of people use to inform themselves about the world, to draw conclusions about human behavior, guide policy decisions, and make sense of their culture and society. Sociologists inherently understand the value of responsible writing and the neutral presentation of facts — Wikipedia is your chance to put theory into practice!

Understand the guidelines

Wikipedia editors in the social sciences have developed specific guidelines for writing about sociology-related topics. Because so much of the world can be analyzed for its social significance, some restrictions on sociology posts are inevitable. Take extra time to read and understand the guidelines here to make sure you meet the requirements when you post to Wikipedia.

If you post something that doesn’t meet these guidelines, someone will have to clean up after you, costing valuable volunteer time that could have been used to improve content. If you’re not comfortable working under these guidelines, talk to your instructor about an alternative off-wiki assignment.

Engage with editors

Part of the Wikipedia experience is receiving and responding to feedback from other editors. Do not submit your content on the last day, then leave Wikipedia! Human volunteers from the Wikipedia community will likely read and respond to it, and it would be polite for you to acknowledge the time they volunteer to polish your work. You may not get a comment, but if you do, please acknowledge it.

Watch out for close paraphrasing

You must write things in your own words on Wikipedia. Plagiarizing by copy-and-pasting or close paraphrasing — when most of the words are changed, but the structure and meaning of the original text remains — is against the rules.

For a Wikipedia assignment, such plagiarism is a violation of your university’s academic honor code. Cleaning up after plagiarism also takes a tremendous amount of volunteer time that would otherwise go into building Wikipedia. If you plagiarize on Wikipedia, it is extremely likely that you’ll be caught by other editors and there will be a permanent online record of your plagiarism tied to your account. Note that even with standard resources or authors, you cannot directly copy descriptions of social concepts, studies, or theories into Wikipedia.

You may use direct quotation when it is important to keep the original wording, but be sure to explicitly mark what is being quoted and cite the source.

Scared? Don’t be!

Have a healthy respect for why these rules exist: Everybody on Wikipedia wants to make the best encyclopedia they can. Take the time to understand the rules, and soon you’ll be contributing to a resource you use daily!

Page 2: Choosing an article

Generally, follow these guidelines when determining which sociology article to improve:

• Choose a topic with extensive literature in independent, peer-reviewed journals and books. Some articles are short simply because there isn’t enough literature to expand them.
• Choose a topic that isn’t already well-developed on Wikipedia (look for what’s known as “stub” or “start-class” articles — check the talk page for an article’s rating).
• You may wish to search for interesting and plentiful sources first, then choose a Wikipedia article to develop based on what you find.
• Social phenomenon could merit their own article, or be ripe for improvement from a sociological perspective. Some topics — such as the Coase theorem — may benefit from adding a sociological perspective to an existing page. Other topics may be purely sociological in focus, such as industrial sociology.

What is the Lead section?

The lead section is the most important section of a Wikipedia article, and it takes a particular form. A good lead section will summarize the entire article in 1–4 paragraphs, providing context and briefly covering all of the important aspects of the topic. The first sentence — which usually starts with the name of the topic in bold — serves as a definition of the topic and indicates why it is important.

One good strategy for writing a Wikipedia article is to draft a lead section first, which you can then use as an outline for the rest of the article. Revise it as you go to make sure it accurately summarizes the body of the article.

Organizing your article

Every article will be unique, but there are some general sections that readers and other editors will expect to see in your article. The following sections are proposed scaffolds for various types of sociology articles, general outlines of sections you should include in your article. You can add, remove, or reorder sections as appropriate for your topic or article improvement. If you’re writing on a topic not shown here, visit the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:GA-Class_sociology_articles for high-quality articles in sociology, and find a topic similar to yours to see how other editors have organized their articles.

An article on a prominent figure in sociology:

• Lead section
• Career
• Personal Life
• Major contributions
• Publications
• Legacy

A great reference for a sociology biography page is W. E. B. Du Bois (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._E._B._Du_Bois) or Max Weber (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber).

An article on a sociological theory (such as feminism, postmodernism, or structuralism) may be more freely defined within the contours of the concept. As such, you should think carefully about the structure of your article, or what you can contribute to a pre-existing one. Useful touchstones include the following:

• Lead section
• Definition of the theory
• An overview offering some context and history for the theory, including prominent theorists and/or works
• When applicable, empirical evidence supporting the theory
• Implications of the theory (perhaps across fields)
• Reception of the theory, leading into brief coverage of the theories derived from it
• Criticisms of the theory

An article on sociological research will probably need to be adapted according to the specifics of the topic. Some sections to consider for any sociology related article are:

• What is its context and history?
• Explore differences: What does research suggest which might point to differences in how your subject manifests between countries, time periods, or socio-economic conditions?
• If observations are reported, what methodologies, or theories, are these observations grounded in?

Page 3: Finding sources

How do you identify sources you can use to build your Wikipedia article?

Ideally your sources should be reliable, published, and generally, reviewed by a third party for accuracy. In any article, the majority view and significant minority views should be presented in a neutral manner. Keep in mind, too, that “published” work can include films, podcasts, or other work produced by a reliable author. So, for example, The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology can be cited as Slavoj Zizek in a Wikipedia article.

Ultimately, you must decide for yourself if a source can be considered reliable and relevant.

Evaluating sources

Learning to evaluate sources is a core component of engaging critically in your field and on Wikipedia.
The first consideration is the author. Authors published in a peer review process are preferred to authors who self-publish, whether that be a blog post or a book series. Of course, many experts in the field may write blog posts or conduct interviews which are not peer reviewed. These may be sources of information about the perspectives or biographical details of an individual, but rarely should they be used for sourcing factual information.

The second consideration is the text itself. Take note that many writers, particularly in the popular press, tend to wade into sociological territory, but do not have proper training as social scientists. In this case, weigh the conclusions of the article or book against the dominant conclusions of those in your field. Does it align with the scholarly consensus? If so, is there a better, more reliable source that you could use to illustrate the same point?

Finally, consider the publisher. Work cited could come from a reliable publisher of sociology literature, such as Sage Publications, Routledge, or the Penn State Press for books, or journals such as The American Sociological Review or The American Journal of Sociology. Take care citing as fact any material from publications which advocate strongly for a particular point of view. When in doubt, be sure to see if the board of the publication is tied to an accredited university. Otherwise, such advocacy journals should only be used to provide examples of their particular viewpoints.

Finally, be aware that while Wikipedia requires a neutral tone for articles, it does not require neutral sources. Impassioned pleas, used carefully, may make excellent quotations for illustrating a particular viewpoint. Be sure to attribute the text in your source, and when possible, acknowledge the relevant sociological perspective: “According to the feminist theorist Judith Butler...”

Using scholarship

Secondary sources are always preferred to primary sources. Book reviews or textbooks are generally better than citing original research. Ultimately, consider the status of scholarly work as you would consider any other source. Has it been properly vetted?

For example, in the case of dissertations, has the dissertation had an impact on the general consensus of the field? You can check citations indexes to help you determine if the resource is useful.

Learning to evaluate sources is a core component of engaging critically in your field and on Wikipedia.

Page 4: Writing your article

• Don’t offer analysis or conclusions; you’re writing fact-based descriptions of information.
• Unlike most school assignments,Wikipedia doesn’t permit original research. A Wikipedia article should cover what the literature says.
• Be sure you’re writing fact-based encyclopedic content, not an essay. See the Editing Wikipedia brochure linked from your course page if you need a refresher on the difference in tone.
• Give appropriate weight to aspects of the topic as the literature covers it.
• Remember, your audience isn’t studying sociology! When mentioning technical terms for the first time, provide a short plain-English explanation in parentheses if possible.
• Let the facts speak for themselves. Respect your readers and recognize that empirical data doesn’t always lead two readers to the same conclusion, and consider what this means about your own interpretations of empirical data.
• Be aware of your own perspective in writing. Writing for Wikipedia is an opportunity to examine your relationship to facts, interpretations and biases.
• Aim for specificity. Do not to overstate research findings! What did the research actually find? For example, if (hypothetical) research found that church attendance in the US has declined over a decade, do not write that “Americans have become less religious over the past decade.” Specificity can help you to avoid problematic stereotypes and generalizations in your articles.
• If you discuss research, aim for a thorough description of its methodologies. This is why it is important to understand your material and cross-reference your understanding with a variety of sources.

Final thoughts

• Don’t procrastinate! Writing good, reliable Wikipedia articles takes time. Don’t wait until the last minute, but if you get stuck, always ask your instructor for extra time rather than adding content to Wikipedia that doesn’t meet these guidelines.
• If you have additional questions about contributing to Wikipedia, post a question at the Teahouse. You can find the Teahouse by entering "WP:TH" into the search bar.
• Take pride in your contributions! Your hard work helps share your knowledge with the millions of people who use Wikipedia every day.