Editing Online Communities and Crowds (Spring 2025)/Wikipedia assignment (section)

== Wikipedia Advising Report ==

;Due: May 16, 5pm
;Deliverables:
* 1,000 words (max) report submitted as a subpage of your Wikipedia userpage.
* A link to your report [https://canvas.northwestern.edu/courses/229769/assignments/1558282 submitted via Canvas]

=== Prompt ===

Members of the Wikipedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) are reviewing and developing recommendations regarding the [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view Neutral Point of View (NPOV) policies] that guide the encyclopedic projects. Specifically, the Foundation and community have formed a working group to recommend common "global" NPOV policies that can be adopted and applied across all Wikipedia language editions. For this assignment, I want you to imagine that the working group has contacted you seeking recommendations for designing and implementing the new, common NPOV policies.

For context, the [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mission WMF's mission] is:
:''The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.''
It's important to underscore that the mission contains both an ambition to disseminate high-quality educational material ''and'' a goal to engage people in its production.

'''Your job is to produce a short report (1000 words max) drawing on materials from this class to advise these leaders about how they ought to understand the challenge of designing common NPOV policies and go about it.''' The best insights will draw on intelligent reflections on the themes and materials of this course to make concrete, specific, and sophisticated recommendations that carefully consider potential drawbacks and unintended consequences. 

Please note: You do not need to draw on resources beyond the course materials (readings, lectures, assignments, case discussions, etc.) to produce your report. However, you may feel free to do so. 

Some additional context and resources that may be useful:
* [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2025-2026/Global_Trends/Common_global_standards_for_NPOV_policies This page of the Wikimedia Foundation 2025-2026 Annual Plan] as well as [https://diff.wikimedia.org/2025/03/27/strengthening-wikipedias-neutral-point-of-view/ this blogpost written by WMF staff] provide an overview of the current WMF initiatives on NPOV and might be useful to get a sense of what's involved. For your report you are welcome to evaluate these specific initiatives and/or suggest new approaches.
* NPOV is considered one of the [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Founding_principles founding principles] guiding Wikipedia since its inception. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has long insisted that NPOV is "non-negotiable." 
* Different language editions have developed their own distinct versions of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines Wikipedia policies and guidelines]. For example, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view the English Wikipedia NPOV policy page] is ''extensive'' and links to numerous other policies, guidelines, tutorials, and essays. Other large Wikipedias have comparably detailed policy pages. However, at present, there is no singular NPOV policy that applies across all Wikipedia language editions.
* Article content varies significantly across language editions. For example, coverage of contentious topics and events such as the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_war Gaza War] is ''very'' different depending on language edition.
* Wikipedia contributors and the WMF are frequently targeted over NPOV concerns. For example, governments, interest groups, and others regularly seek to undermine the credibility of Wikipedia and/or threaten Wikipedia editors as well as the WMF with legal actions or public campaigns of various kinds. [https://diff.wikimedia.org/2025/05/02/risk-preparedness-in-the-foundations-annual-plan/ Risk preparedness and protection ] of the encyclopedias, the editors, and the communities are important components of the ongoing conversations about NPOV.





<!---
Members of the Wikipedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) are brainstorming approaches for using generative AI and large language models to create Wikipedia content. There is [[:Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Using neural network language models on Wikipedia|a page on Wikipedia about these ideas]] that might be useful to get a sense of what people are considering.

For this assignment, I want you to imagine that the WMF staff has contacted you seeking recommendations on managing the impact of generative AI tools on the Wikipedia online community. For context, the [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mission WMF's mission] is:

:''The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally.''

For this assignment, it's important to understand that the mission contains both a desire to produce high-quality educational material ''and'' a goal to engage people in its production.

Your job is to produce a short report (1000 words max) drawing on materials from this class to advise these leaders about how they ought to understand this challenge (generative AI) and how they might progress toward addressing its impact in their community. The best insights will draw on intelligent reflections on the themes and materials of this course to make concrete, specific, and sophisticated recommendations that carefully consider potential drawbacks and unintended consequences. You are welcome to evaluate the specific suggestions in [[:Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Using neural network language models on Wikipedia|the brainstorming page]] or suggest new approaches.

Please note: You do ''not'' need to draw on resources beyond the course materials (readings, lectures, assignments, case discussions, etc.) to produce your report. However, you may feel free to do so.
--->

=== Submission guidelines ===

;Deliverables (due by May 16, 5pm):
* A 1,000 word report created and saved as a subpage of your Wikipedia user page. 
* You will also need to submit the URL of the subpage of your report via [https://canvas.northwestern.edu/courses/229769/assignments/1558282 Canvas]

For example, I would create mine with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aaronshaw/Report as the URL. Of course, you should replace "Aaronshaw" with your Wikipedia username. You can also go to your user page by clicking on your username on Wikipedia and then adding "/Report" at the end of the URL. When you go to that page, it will say Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact name. You can create a new page by just clicking the "Create" tab on that page. However you do it, when you're done, you can paste the resulting URL into Canvas.

Please note that Wikipedia pages can support references, footnotes, headers, and formatting options and you will have learned to use these features as part of your work on your Wikipedia articles. 

'''Caveat:''' To avoid losing any work, I strongly recommend drafting your report somewhere other than the browser-based editor of Wikipedia.

=== Assessment ===

First and foremost, your report will be evaluated on the degree to which it provides useful, informed, and actionable advice to the Wikipedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation. It will also be evaluated on the degree to which you engage with the course material. See the [[User:Aaronshaw/Assessment#Written_work | assessment rubric for written work]] for details on my expectations regarding the content of papers. A successful essay will do the following things:

# Provide detailed, concrete, and actionable advice to the Wikipedia community and the Wikimedia Foundation. What should Wikipedia think about doing? What should they think about changing?
# Justify your recommendations regarding the theories and principles we've covered. Why should your recommendations be taken more seriously than just random advice from someone on the internet?
# To the extent it is relevant, feel free to comment directly on your experience in Wikipedia. When you do so, connect your experiences in Wikipedia explicitly to the concepts in the course material we have covered.

You will receive comments and feedback on your assignment. Also, please note that this assignment is shorter but extremely similar to what you will do in your Community Advising Report at the end of the quarter. As a result, you can treat this as a "mid-term" and make adjustments to your approach based on feedback.

=== Additional guidance and FAQ ===

There's no minimum word count, but I'd strongly suggest you take advantage of the space you're given. Generally speaking, you can say more, be more insightful, and demonstrate more fluency (all the things that figure in assessment) if you use more space.

Your audience is Wikipedians who may read your report. You don't need to define things to prove to anyone that you've done the reading. You should define terms if you think an audience of Wikipedians (who have not taken the class) will be lost/confused otherwise. You should attribute quotes, concepts, or key ideas to sources appropriately (yes, use citations to do this). Use your judgment to make a compelling, well-reasoned, and well-supported argument. The goal is to show that you are fluent in the course material. A fluent person does not try to use every word in a language; they simply use the most appropriate ones.

In terms of structure, please adopt a format that will best support the substance of your argument and ideas. Something with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion is reliable and useful. If you feel it's better or useful to deviate from that, go for it.

There is no specific guidance regarding style (e.g., APA, Chicago, etc.) or how to format the references. Ensure others can read the paper clearly and find any papers you cite.



<!---

== Identifying topics for your articles ==

You will need to create a new article on Wikipedia with your teams. But how can you find a topic that is worthy of an article and also not already covered on Wikipedia? As it turns out, there are many resources to help you with this created by Wikipedia editors! A few suggestions and examples follow below. 

In general, we recommend picking topics that more experienced Wikipedia editors have already identified as meeting the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability notability criteria] for inclusion in the encyclopedia. When someone identifies a topic as potentially worthy of an article on Wikipedia, but no article exists, the text will appear as a red hyperlink (the red means that a page does not exist with that name). When you find red links, you have a hint that at least one other person thinks an article is worth creating on that topic. However, just because you or really anyone thinks a topic merits an article does not mean that it automatically will meet the notability criteria. Sometimes, it can be a struggle to convince other Wikipedia editors that a topic is sufficiently notable! We'll discuss all of this later, but suffice to say it's something to consider as you brainstorm topic ideas. 

It's also worth noting that you can absolutely come up with topics on your own without using any of the lists below. If you have some knowledge about a topic that you and your group members agree to be notable and worthy of a Wikipedia article we encourage you to propose it as a topic!

=== Lists of potential article topics ===

A great place to start finding potential article topics is the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/List_of_stubs list of "stub" articles"]. Stubs are very short, very incomplete articles. On the upside, someone has probably already looked at them and decided the topic is worth including/covering, so you're less likely to face pushback on the notability of the subject in the first place.

If you feel compelled to work on totally ''de-novo'' topics that do not yet have an article, that's great. Just brace yourself for a little extra work and possibly for questions (from other Wikipedia volunteers!) about whether or not the topic of your article meets [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability Wikipedia's notability criteria].

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red "Women in red" (WiR)] is an initiative across Wikipedia that seeks to create and populate articles on notable women to address their disproportionate under-representation in the encyclopedia. The WiR project maintains a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Redlist_index redlist index], which is an index of mostly red links for potential article topics that you might pursue.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_scientists WikiProject Women Scientists] is also a great source for potential article topics. Emily Temple-Wood, a Wikipedia editor who Aaron mentioned in his introductory lecture, maintains a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keilana/Female_scientist_list list of notable women scientists], many of whom do not yet have articles about them. Check out her list and investigate any of the names in red (hint: you'll need to look them up somewhere other than Wikipedia!) for ideas.

There is a general [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_articles requested articles list] as well. Again, dig through some of these topic areas and check out topics listed in red. 

Remember, just because ''someone'' thinks an article should exist is no guarantee that you or others will agree with them. You need to use some judgment in selecting an article that is interesting (according to you), feasible (for you to develop), and meets the standards of inclusion in Wikipedia (according to you as well as other Wikipedians).
--->