User:SheridanFord/subpage

WikiEdu Courses

Winter 2013, Intersession course: Women in Hip-Hop Course, Baruch College-CUNY

In the Winter of 2013, my students and I tried to fill a void but creating an entry on women in hip-hop. At the time there was none. Focus was on inequality and the democratization of tech/knowledge.

March 2016 - , Joined Wikimedia NYC Chapter

This year I also became an active editor (more than 5 times a month) and joined the local NYC chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia New York City. I also have participated in meetups with AfroCrowd.

June 2016, NYU Faculty Resource Network Seminar: More Connected, More Disconnected

The Faculty Resource Network at NYU, where I was once on faculty, invited me to convene a seminar on millennials and social media for 25 college professors from Puerto Rico to Hawaii including members from HBCUs. We met for a week and I introduced them to editing Wikipedia. Two thirds of them started the week-long seminar with a disdain for Wikipedia. All had edited and were inspired to continue editing Wikipedia by the end of the week. I invited several members of WikiMedia NYC to lecture including AfroCrowd and Ann Matsuuchi, Long Island University. A member of Data & Society also visited the seminar.

We concluded the seminar with an insight from one of the professors turned Wikipedians:

If all knowledge is personal, than all politics are local. (acknowledgments to @Juantele: You created this idea!)

I will be publishing materials we crowdsourced eventually.

Summer Session I 2016, Intro to Sociology Course, Baruch College-CUNY

This summer, 12 students and I are learning the basics of sociology while we also learn to become Wikipedia editors or Wikipedians. Our final project involves studying the knowledge produced and the culture of editing using first-hand, personal study on the site.

For 2-3 weeks, we will conduct participant-observation as Wikipedians to examine questions of power and representation (or the matrix of domination) among Wikipedians (editors) using a mixed method approach of quantitative and qualitative data. The View History page of any article offers a lot of rich data to analyze.

The question we are collaboratively exploring by editing articles of our choice is this: What issues of power and oppression can be discovered in the free-of-cost encyclopedia that provides knowledge to the world as the sixth most visited site on the Internet? We are applying the three main sociological perspectives -- functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic interactionism -- as well as examining how personal troubles as an editor reflect public or political issues.

Participants are editing articles including Lacrosse, Trump, Brexit, Transactionalism, Mass Shootings, microsociology, symbolic interactionism, Barbeque, SpongeBob SquarePants, Xenocentrism, Gatekeeping, Twerking, Jambole, and more. Among the 12 participants and myself we represent four women (a Black woman, two Latina women, and a White woman) and eight men (two Chinese men, two Black, one Latino man, and five White men). Several among us were born outside the US.

By allowing our diverse interests to thrive (you can edit anything you want), we should also witness the barriers that editors encounter in a complex way. Who is being reverted for what? Could the reverting activity be a function of being neophyte editors making mistakes? And could it also be related to the unconscious bias of writing like women and people of color from various backgrounds and linguistic differences?

The rules of Wikipedia -- its five pillars -- concludes with the fifth pillar:

Wikipedia has no firm rules: Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions. Be bold but not reckless in updating articles. And do not agonize over making mistakes: every past version of a page is saved, so mistakes can be easily corrected.

What fascinates me most about Wikipedia is how a free democratic space self-polices its members. There is no "authority" above like in a workplace or in the classroom, that tells us who we should edit and whose words are true, good, or objective. Given the diversity of human experiences and cultures, and given the discrimination found in EVERY culture and nation on the planet, there cannot be ONE neutral point of view in editing Wikipedia. It has to be that we are subtly inviting the predominately white and male gang of editors who dominate the space of knowledge production to reach back to what they inherited as a frame for policing the boundaries of knowledge on Wikipedia.

By contrast, what I also love about Wikipedia, is that it has the potential to help undergrads as well as professors (if they would stop slamming the site) who join the WikiEdu program learn to more deeply understand the socialization of knowledge and understand the process of resocialization that stands behind both social capital and human capital. Both thrive from diversity of knowledge, skills, and perspectives. There cannot be ONE point of view or what of being neutral that is right and true. Note the practice of strong objectivity.

This kind of creative work points at issues like ethics and how we develop trust in the small acts of editing to the big acts of our educational systems with its forms of political and oppression socialization. Trust is not granted without earning it even on Wikipedia -- or so it seems. In some cases, it was clear to those of us "outsiders" or newbies on Wikipedia that the experience of oppression was surfacing in incidences of being reverted. So I've come to think of editing Wikipedia as not only a form of knowledge activism and a fieldwork of anthropological study or micro-sociological study. It is also a really insightful process for learning to experience and witness how oppression works if done collaboratively on Wikipedia. One can truly begin to appreciate and examine intersecting oppressions -- heteropatriarchy, racism, heterosexism, misogynoir, transphobia, and the hegemony of a white supremacist, capitalist, political economy of money, knowing, labor, and value when one becomes an editor of Wikipedia and one is either a member of a marginalized group or being asked to think like one as part of a course focused on the culture and knowledge of marginalized or vulnerable groups. To become part of the crowd sourcing of Wikipedia with its mantra of creating the "sum of all human knowledge" and to be reverted is to gain insight into how power works online and off. Sharing as well as observing how we edit, what we edit, whose edits stick and whose don't; what is expected around certain hegemonic or hot topics and what is not allowed or expected; what article topics are still missing or missed altogether, and observing the fear and trepidation that shows up for millennials who are supposed to be so "comfortable" with tech and content creation--all this and more become apparent when editing Wikipedia with a mindset focused on the marginalized, the different, or the most vulnerable groups or topics of knowledge in our worlds.

[As of Summer/June 2016:] The Wikipedia Community has produced over 5 million articles in the English version produced by just over 100,000 editors who have been almost exclusively white and male. Learning how to negotiate the production of knowledge in an information economy provides many critical insights into how knowledge (and thus power) is organized by individuals as well as by groups and social institutions/structures. Editing Wikipedia provides insight into how knowledge is used (and how it uses us), who gets access (and whose access is left out), and who has control over knowledge by using what tactics and by way of which kinds of beliefs and practices (conscious and unconscious). [Rev. and edited 4/9/2019].

I'll end with a quote from Frederick Douglass (1857):

The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims have been born of earnest struggle. The conflict has been exciting, agitating, all-absorbing, and for the time being, putting all other tumults to silence. It must do this or it does nothing. If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.

SOC 1004 July 2016 notes

1. Community. 13:02, 1 July 2016‎ Kyraocity (talk | contribs)‎ . . (46,085 bytes) (+756)‎ . . (Added a citation and paraphrased a definition from the Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology Online to clean up minor distinctions that may have been misleading in the opening paragraph.) & 13:05, 1 July 2016‎ Kyraocity (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (46,095 bytes) (+8)‎ . . (Cleaning up a previous edit and paraphrased a direct quote from Blackwell Ency of Sociology Online.) [NOTE: I was creating an assignment for SOC1005 on Christian Fuchs writing on Wikipedia]

Summer Class

In my new Wikipedian experience i found out how much information that has been aggregated throughout history has been transcribed by every day people. I have also found a higher confidence in the reputation of this information by seeing the obstacles one may face when trying to edit and post on Wikipedia pages. I'm now able to view Wikipedia through a different lens and can really appreciate the pages i contributed to. Being scientific in nature, it makes me feel like i'm a part of history as i can imagine some of the people who would look to read that page.

ZeroDaVinci (talk)

Dark Matter -- Fundamental Interaction -- Fifth Force

Winter SOC 1005 Final Presentation Samples

User talk:Hasnain0980#course takeaway

• Social inequality was a very interesting class that allowed me to notice that everything is not as equal aswe may think and that there is a certain aspect of race, gender, age, etc. attached with thoseinequalities. From the readings and the study papers I learned more about inequality and why peopleare treated unfairly. I also learned how to paraphrase and practicing that allowed me to have an easiertime editing Wikipedia. The course made me think of peoples’ situations from another prospective andmade me question why things are the way they are. And with the recent inauguration and the proteststhat are occurring because of it, I was able to see both sides of what people wanted and I was able tosee why people are happy or unhappy with the situation. This course opened up my mind to thedifficulties that people go through just because of their age, race, gender, etc. and even though I knewthat racism and sexism weren’t right coming into the class, the course provided me with newinformation and different reasons as to why we should be against all those things. Through the use ofWikipedia I learned that there are many people that are proofreading and changing the website to makeit as accurate as possible and that the information on there has to be cited to ensure unbiasedinformation is available for everyone to use without any issues. My biggest takeaway from the coursewas that although we may try to convince everyone outside the United States that we are the greatestand most equal country, the course shows that we are far from that because of the way that we treateach other and the way that the government and ourselves do things to make it harder to coexist [Prof: Caution framing as if there are only two sides to social inequalities. This does work for race, gender, sexuality, feminism, nation, language and esp class.]
• The most impactful thing I have learned from this sociology course is thetheory of Structural Functionalism. The idea that society is a complexinterconnected system, where each part (both individual and institution) workscongruently as a functional whole has really stuck with me. Living in New York City,it is easy to become immune to the humanity of others. What I mean by that is, thatit is easy to forget that each person plays a functional role in not only his or herpersonal lives, but in society as well. We (myself especially) pass hundreds of peopleeach day without even acknowledging them—without even saying thank you. WhileI would agree that it is impractical to genuinely thank strangers, especially beingunaware of the role they play. A genuine smile can go a long way. Becoming afriendlier person, following Carnegie’s Secrets of Success, is one habit I plan tocontinue.After learning about Wikipedia’s objective, to be a platform for the freeknowledge movement, I completely support Wikipedia and the contributions madeto it. I appreciate this experience because it allowed me to publicly shareinformation that would otherwise be private and for-sale. Wikipedia is a platformwhere privileged individuals, in the sense that they have access knowledge otherindividuals cannot afford or obtain, can try to equalize the knowledge gap by simplyproviding free access. This assignment also encouraged me to challengeauthoritative figures who would normally speak negatively about Wikipedia. Bytaking my assignment and responsibility seriously, I reject the idea that Wikipedia isnot a valuable source of knowledge. The Wikipedia page Educational Inequality wasonly created in 2008, and by 2009 it was nominated for deletion. Thankfully, theeditors decided to keep the article, however there has not been much edits made tothe page since. (On average, only 2 edits per month).

User talk:Amandaxiaowenli

• One of the most impactful works I read from this course was Colin Gordon’s Growing Apart, particularly the “Usual Suspects” section. I constantly referred back to this text in many of my study papers, and I found it extremely relevant to many of the topics that we explored in the lectures even after that assignment. I loved how Colin Gordon takes each common misconception for social inequality in America and dissects it. He explains that he sees why these misconceptions are in existence, but refutes their validity and then takes it a step further to analyze the true underlying root cause of the issue. He understands that it is not the surface-level action that is to be blamed. Rather, it is the people and our society’s reaction to it, for example the stigma against single motherhood, or lack of U.S. policies to address these issues that is the real culprit. Time and time again, he successfully uses statistical findings to support his stances; showing that although the U.S. is typically in the median or a lower-level ranking for issues that people typically blame for inequality, it is still constantly in the highest level of inequality. In conjunction with this, what I found to be ironic is that Trump had actually based his campaign on the premise that he was going to fix America. However, the way he did so was by attributing inequality to factors that Colin Gordon specifically mentioned to be common misconceptions. The first being globalization; instead of looking to improve upon a lack of labor protection policies and regulations, Trump says he aims to bring jobs back to America by preventing foreigners from taking them. Many of the people who voted for him were factory workers who didn’t want to lose their jobs and voted for him based on this promise. Gordon specifically states that this is misunderstood because all countries face globalization; it is an abstract and an inevitable force. In fact, the U.S. is less exposed to trade than its peers, yet more unequal than almost all of them. The second misconception Trump based his campaign on wastechnology; instead of addressing the underlying issue, they say millennials with computer skills and degrees are taking all of the jobs. His voters lamented over this, when in reality income fell most where union presence was least, regardless of degrees and technical skills. I definitely don’t want to bring political views into discussion or impose my views in any way, but I did find this very interesting and wanted to mention it in the most neutral and objective way. The next eye-opening experience was from watching the documentary, The Divide, in which I realized the privileges that were bestowed upon me from the SHSAT (Specialized High School Admissions Test) that is administered throughout New York City every year. In one scene, a well-off couple from a gated community stated that they based where they live around the schools in the neighborhood. They wanted to enroll their children to an all-girls school named Ardsley which had a good reputation. It struck a chord with me when I thought about those who could not afford to move to areas with a reputable academic environment. What about those living in other states who did not have a chance to take an admissions exam? They have no choice but to enroll in their zone school. I never doubted the presence of academic inequality, but until that assignment, I had also never thought much about it. I am lucky because I got into Stuyvesant High School. I am also lucky because in the NYC education system, there are many choices based on your middle school GPA, so I was also accepted to Townsend Harris, a reputable liberal arts high school that would have been my back-up had I not scored high enough for Stuyvesant. I’m not sure where I would be otherwise, but I know high school definitely shaped me into the person I am today. It frightens me to place myself in the perspective of a student in another state who has no option but to attend the school in their neighborhood that they live near, even if it may not have a good reputation or academic environment. It scares me to think about those who have so much potential within them, yet are unable to harness it and use it to its fullest, until eventually it is lost after a while; all because they had to attend a school that did not match their caliber or could not match their learning needs. If I hadn’t succeeded on the SHSAT or been accepted to my “choice” high schools, I would have been placed in my zone school, which is a rundown school on the brink of being closed down for poor academic performance. From Kimberle Crenshaw’s TED Talk, “The Urgency of Intersectionality,” I could see myself as part of a group that is “injustice squared.” As an Asian-American woman, I am also straddling two roads; being a female and a minority. In the process of writing the study paper for that subject, I was moved to further investigate the “bamboo ceiling” and found that already there were very few articles, movements, or campaigns addressing inequality faced by Asian Americans. Yet, what shouldn’t have been surprising to me yet still shocked me was that, none of those articles addressed specifically Asian-American women struggles in the workplace. In fact, even the book “Breaking the Bamboo Ceiling” written by woman author Jane Hyun, failed to address specifically Asian-American women struggles in America’s corporate environment. Instead, it focused on Asian Americans in general. This really brought the issue into perspective for me, and struck me as to how real the problems with intersectionality is. In addition, upon asking my friends and mentors who are planning to take the GMATs for business school admissions if they know about the recently implemented score segregation, almost none of them knew about it. Those who are currently taking courses to prepare for the exam and are taking practice tests are ignorant of the fact that they are now segregating scores; separating Asian scores from all other scores in an effort to rank students with “more clarity.” It is completely unfair, and upon hearing this, many of my friends felt anger. However, that is the point. This event has barely been publicized and has not received any news coverage besides one article in the Wall Street Journal, and I can’t help but wonder if they suppressed it on purpose. If they didn’t want the uproar and backlash associated with it, and instead decided to keep it under wraps, figuring Asian-Americans wouldn’t speak out about it regardless. This was where many things came into perspective for me as well. I thought back to some of the micro events that have happened to me in the workplace and at corporate events previously, and I can’t help but link some of these happenings to the bigger “bamboo ceiling” barrier. I realized I haven’t been as aware of my heritage and what comes along with it as I thought, and this was a true example of applying sociological imagination to my life. This was in addition to reflecting back on my own academic privileges, linking it to the academic institutions in New York City, and thinking about many “what-ifs” as mentioned before. Overall, there are many current events happening in our society today that has been brought to my attention through this accelerated winter course. I was able to explore fresh ideas and gain inspiration from things I didn’t know about before, such as video games that allow for identity-tourism; I want to enter a student competition for a TED Talk based on this subject (this year’s TEDxCuny theme is Circuits and the effects of digital/social media). I was able to look at myself and think about the four theoretical perspectives of sociology and how each comes into play in my life. Feminism certainly plays a major role, along with structural-functional in which I can clearly see myself within each of the systems that I have belonged in and currently belong in. On the other hand, social conflict theory is more general and it has pushed me to explore different types of political governance and what types of leadership are deemed most effective; applicable even in the corporate environment. Lastly, symbolic interactionism is ubiquitous, permeating every aspect of our lives. We encounter them everyday, and language is a form of symbolic interactionism as well, whether spoken or written. All in all, I haven’t taken such an enriching course in a long time. This course has pushed me to not only be more introspective and retrospective, but has permeated the way I approach my personal situations as well. The topics studied are tangible issues in today’s society that have yet to be resolved. I feel so empowered and inspired because of this class, and I feel as though I have something to do; a mission to raise awareness of these issues in my social circle and talk about societal issues more. By training my sociological imagination, I am able to relate personal issues to bigger issues at hand very quickly. This not only instills more understanding in me, but shows me that personal encounters and struggles can be turned into opportunities to make changes, one step or one day at a time.

• We started our semester with an understanding of the importance of deliberatepractice. A perfect/great outcome can only come from a skilled individual andpractice is the only way that can make one skilled/perfect. So when we talk aboutsuccess we often think Labor is behind success whether work is what we aresupposed to do. “Labor” is what one needs to do to survive whether “Work” is forlegacy/luxury. To create a successful work it is essential to enable the ability of thinking critically,which is a way of approaching a question that allows us to carefully deconstruct asituation, reveal its hidden issues, such as bias and manipulation, and make the bestdecision. It was very important to stress our brain and prepare this to face the true reality whichI have never realized in my life. Being in the USA I though everyone in this countryhas the equal access to resources. Throughout the course we have experiences theharsh reality of Social Inequality, wealth and educational inequality, redlining andreparations for racial bias, how we minorities are trapped with gender, marriage andpoverty and incarceration. Most importantly how we have framed our brain that wedon’t even realize intersectionality with in our race. All this things are very scary,but the question is are we scared?? After this whole semester I could truly say that, I understood the power of thesociological imagination that enables my ability of thinking critically. Knowing thelimitation of our ability to access resources, I understood it is most important for meto develop a habit of deliberate practice. I’m not scared anymore, because I know ifI can make the perfect use of the limited resources that I have I can achieve my goal.

User:Dinocako

• During this winter sociology course, I can say I had a wonderful experience. It waschallenging and I learned a lot that I will apply to my life. The most crucial component of thisclass which I benefitted a lot from is sociological imagination. It has factors such as troubles andissues, and its something that changed my point of view among everyday life. Deliberatepractice is something I’ve never heard of before this course but it genuinely is a concept I willalways apply in my life. I learned about a mistake I was always doing, multitasking, and it willenable me to be further my productiveness. My overall paraphrasing has sincerely improvethrough deliberate practice and the wiki assignments. It was a challenge to me but deliberatepractice enabled me to overall it and now it is simple. As the course required me to readvarious text, Professor Gaunt taught me something I really like. Which is the 3,2,1 technique.This enables me as a reader to note what I notice, question the articles, and take awaysomething unique. I would require everyone, not only students, to do this technique. I starteddoing it with documentaries and movies. The course moved on to editing wikipeda and as IWikipedian, I discovered that there is a great amount of knowledge that is not available. It ishard to adjust yourself into the community but deliberate practice will benefit. The site shouldcontinued to be contributed because there is a great amount of individuals all of the world whodo not have access to research such as College students. I had a frustrating experience onwikipeda on editing a fitness article. I contributed so much knowledgeable resources onto thisarticle, all for an editor to revert it. I would apply structural-functionalism to my situationbecause I did not know how to society operated and I should’ve taken appropriate precautions.My sociological imagination has improved notoriously. I developed habits of viewing socialstructures in different perspectives, trying to place myself in it to imagine my experience, andseeking problems in societies that are related to another.As for feedback about the course. I can honestly saw it was not at all what I thought itwas. I had a lot of distaste in my previous sociology course (101) due to the way it was set up. Ithink you should continue to educate exactly how you are doing, I extremely love the fact thatyou do not make us memorize content but instead foster a learning environment such as groupwork and participation between the students, which all contributes to us learning the material.I must say, I never had a course where the environment is as positive as ours and you have agreat talent of encouraging us to speak (I don’t normally participate). One issue I noticed a lotof the students having was the instructions on the wiki assignments. A lot of us were confuseddue to there being a lot of instructions. Other than that, I cannot complain, this class was one ofthe best experiences I’ve had in college. One takeaway that I learned is the sociologicalimagination. The assignment with groups and having an income trying to survive had a hugeimpact on me.

Afro-Crowd EDIT-A-THON

Here at AfroCrowdit 10.3.2016 at Brooklyn Public Library. Jim.Henderson gave me some incredible insights into the community. He invited me to click his watchpage and I did. He said he spent 2 hours working on a photo of a church in Westchester and a dialogue ensued. Then I read the recent discussion from an hour ago. He then added that the network is small be serious. Not like Facebook where the network can be frivolous. Fascinating insight. I mentioned my paper was accepted at the Wiki Conf but I won't be able to go to San Diego because of limited funds even with the travel grant they gave me. :-( But I thought sharing my work on a sub page would be great. Jim helped me create one and it was SO simple. WP: cut and paste my user info from my user page and add slash subpage. See below. sheridanford (talk) 20:51, 2 October 2016 (UTC).

Henderson wrote this on a Daily Signpost in 2018 and I found it incredibly insightful for new users and users who attend Edit-a-Thons. "Jim Henderson (supporting) exposes in the discussion section his experience as an editathon facilitator with an arresting description of those who attend his many sessions in New York:

“ Interesting that the majority of OPPOSE and most of DISCUSSION are about editathons. As it happens I coach at such events more than once most months and they are a useful institution. However, they don't generate many new persistent editors. They mostly attract attendance by promising new biographies, and newbies arrive expecting to make articles about their friends. Friends who, through no fault of their own, are unfortunately still alive and able to benefit. We tell them how difficult this is. (...) Having arrived with the wrong expectation, they may ask for new a direction. We may say they should find and fix Wikipedia's plentiful old, bad articles. (...) If they succeed in finding a few refs and write a new biography in userspace, that's when they run into the 4-day 10-edit barrier. We usually have enough coaches to take care of these directly by a mainspace rename. So, the major problem is the concentration on new BLP [Biographies of Living Persons], and the Autoconfirmed barrier is a minor one. That barrier could be further shrunk by giving Account Creators the right to boost newbies for one day or four, and maybe someone can suggest other methods, but it shouldn't be a reason for allowing the rawest newbies to create articles on their own.

Wikidata idea 2019

Attended the Art+Feminism Edit-a-thon at MOMA 3.2.2019 and talked to members of the NYC Wikimedia Chapter about WikiData as an alternative for my Hip-hop Herstories WikiEdu project. I got an idea from @MEGS to use WikiData to create discographies of all the Black women who ever recorded a rap song or danced as part of hip-hop culture or DJed. All the non-commercial and non-pop artists who have contributed to what hip-hop is including all the women who were in background decorations that former President Obama recently made a sideways comment about twerking at his My Brother’s Keeper Alliance Summit in Oakland, Calif., Tuesday, Feb. 19, 2019. More later. Will intro to class today 3.12.2019. ~~~~

WikiEdu UAlbany MUS/AFS 209 Instructions

WATCH THIS VIDEO FOR GUIDANCE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23_15imPLgI&ab_channel=TheBoringVoice

What you could write about. Leave 2-5 sentences or a paragraph of two for credit

1. What did you learn from becoming a Wikipedian? Before becoming a Wikipedia I ________________. After I __________________.
2. What fears did you overcome after making your first edit and why? Did the interface (text vs. visual) play a role?
3. My top 1-3 insights from becoming an editor of Black Music articles. What did you learn about music as information or as a content gap regarding African americans' music and history?
4. My biggest lessons learned from editing my own interests or the topics...
5. What was my favorite edit (include a URL link and quote what you added) and why?
6. What new competencies did you discover from editing?
7. What new habits or new habits you might take on came from completing all the training as intended relative to your intellectual or academic fitness?
8. Anything else? Be bold. Share about anti-blackness or misogynoir you noticed. Content gaps you improved. Why editing matters.

STOP: Click the Edit button

LOOK: Sign your signature and timestamp: TYPE "~~~~" before you comment.

POST YOUR REVIEW: Position at the bottom of the subheader "BAM 209 F2023 Student Reviews" and hit return to autogenerate the next number.

PUBLISH: Indicate the reason for the edit as: WikiEdu BAM 2023 Review

BAM 209 F2023 Student Reviews

1. @Afrolatinmag: Being an editor of articles about Black music offers a special chance to delve into the rich and varied realm of Black music. I learned how to comprehend its relevance to society, and track its impact on pop culture. Variety of genres, including gospel, R&B, hip-hop, blues, jazz, and more all has its own background, cultural importance, and creative development shaping the community within black music. Black music has played a crucial role in shaping and influencing broader cultural trends, it has an influence not just on the visual arts but also on language, fashion, dance, and other fields. As an editor of Black music-related publications, I get to see how cultural trends change over time and gain insight into how artists both influence and mirror shifting societal dynamics. To put it simply, editing Black music is critical to encouraging diversity, dispelling myths, recording cultural heritage, and ensuring that the many musical traditions that make up the Black community are fairly and accurately represented. It is consistent with the overarching objective of establishing a more just and culturally diverse environment in the music industry and beyond.
2. @SCup1330: Before becoming a Wikipedia editor, I didn’t know a lot about Wikipedia editing. I would only use Wikipedia to do probably some little research. I knew that I could edit Wikipedia, but I didn’t know that you can add literary anything to Wikipedia. I never realized how much misinformation can be added especially in articles created by and about African American culture. Professor G talked about how Wikipedia getting a letter grade and how most Wikipedia articles associated with black culture is letter graded B or less. After I finished Wikipedia editing training and publishing my own edits, it’s important to edit articles spreading misinformation. The class left me with a huge sense of pride in my culture. Learning that it’s okay to correct things that aren’t right and advocate for your own life. My culture is mine. I’ve learned that Culture is the learned ways of feeling, thinking, believing and behaving.
3. @Atrowbridge1: Before becoming a Wikipedia editor, I did not realize Wikipedia was a reputable source. Throughout my schooling, I was taught that Wikipedia was not something to use for academia references. After becoming an editor myself, I realized that Wikipedia is a wonderful tool to use for reference. People just like me are volunteering to improve the site and are adding valuable information for everyone to use. Some insights I have from becoming an editor of Black Music articles is the lack of information in some articles. For example, I added a significant edit to a black slave songs article that lacked information of the additional songs in the book published and edited by William Francis Allen. At first, I was nervous to make an edit because it felt weird that I was adding information to a site that anyone can use on the internet, but I learned that by doing so, I was helping people who viewed that article get more accurate information, even if it was just fixing grammar/punctuation, or adding important information.
4. @UalbBAM209: Before becoming a Wikipedia editor I always strayed away from using Wikipedia, especially for school. For almost all of my education, I have been told that Wikipedia is not a trusted source. Even this semester, one of my Professors proceeded on a whole rant of how it should never be used in an educational environment. But, completing these training modules, and editing, I now see Wikipedia in an entirely different light. Authors are sometimes, normal people, and while "anyone" can edit a page, there are requirements that have to be met in order to do so. Legitimate sources are required to be credited for any outside information, each piece have to be completely unbiased, showing no indication of opinions, just facts. Even if biased, or opinionated information makes it onto a page, it is often taken down by other users going through. While Wikipedia may not be a webpage to source in academic writing, it is a wonderful source to search for simple information that you are looking to learn more about. After becoming a Wikipedia editor, my views on the site have changed. What I have also taken away from this assignment is to always do your own research. That can be taken literally, in regarding doing research for editing our articles, but also in the sense that you should always conduct further individual research on the topics we are taught in school. Like I said, for my whole life, I have been told to never use Wikipedia, but only just now am I finding out that it can actually prove to be a useful source. Some of my favorite edits included going through articles about important woman figures, and changing the word "female" or "lady" to woman in class. As for articles on Black American Music, I never realized the information gap that present was present, or misinformation on articles.
5. @22angelique: I learned a lot from becoming a wikipedia editor. My views of the website changed, and also the view of who can change intellect or who dictates what is valid. I also understand how my input is just as important as anyone else's. As a black person, I think sometimes we are blocked from controlling the narrative sometimes, but we can take control. It just takes initiative and application. I think this class and the wiki training helped me understand that I can contribute to the world in so many ways. Adding something to this wide range of intellect, made me feel important and seen in a way. My edits went to Beyoncé's Renaissance Tour, and I added the cultural impact, because I felt that her impact was there, and gave more love to black queer culture that we all benefit from. I think my biggest fear of editing was how was I going to tackle it. I was scared to mess up, and over thought what I can contribute. I have this thought the I had to sound like this white, articulate white person, (if that makes sense), but I realize that was my own bias toward myself, and some internalized blackness I was taught. Once I realized that it could be anything, due to Professor.G's encouragement, I got over this fear and just let me wings fly.
6. @Rachealbrooks22: Before becoming a Wikipedia editor, I always saw Wikipedia as a site my professors always told me to avoid, and I would only use it as a late source if I could not find anything else. I have always heard this, even in high school. I never understood why Wikipedia was not seen as a reliable source given that most of the information you find on a number of other sites you can find on one page in Wikipedia. After I became an editor, I started to appreciate the craft more. I had always known that users can edit on Wikipedia, and I think that's what scared me the most. I always had it in the back of my mind that people can add wrong information on Wikipedia and therefore it becomes an unreliable source. After becoming an editor, myself, I started to understand the feeling of wanting to put down reliable edits that people can look at and gain information from. Becoming an editor really changed the way I look at Wikipedia now, I have begun to see Wikipedia as a source with intent to get reliable information around the world. My top 2 insights that I learned from becoming an editor of Black music articles is that one the actual writing and study of black music is still relatively new and secondly most of the people who make edits about black music are white people. I noticed the first one given that there are not that many articles compared to their white counterparts on black American music and in the limited number of articles there are there are still mistakes and edits that we learn every day. One being the difference between ‘female’ and ‘woman’. The second one I noticed when I would look at the contributions page and a bunch of the names would be white people names. Now these names could be aliases, however given that white Americans are more likely to have access to education and research it is more likely that the contributors were white people.  
7. @75ridercarmen: My Wikipedia experience has been much easier and more educational than I expected. At first, I was intimidated by the idea of editing Wikipedia articles that millions of people would read and utilize for information. I was nervous that I would make poor edits that would worsen the articles. I also felt very uncomfortable with the process of editing in itself. For example, I did not know how to add citations, add images, or how to publish my edits. However, the trainings and exercises helped me understand the dos and don'ts of editing. The trainings also helped me realize that editing was not complicated at all, and it was, in fact, very straightforward. Eventually, I felt confident enough to make a few simple and minor edits. Another interesting fact I learned from my experience as a Wikipedia editor is that Wikipedia is much more reliable than I thought. In the past, many of my teachers have asserted that the articles are not credible. Therefore, I have always thought that Wikipedia articles could not be cited or used in my work. However, I learned that Wikipedia has rules and guidelines that make the articles more trustworthy. I also learned that a committed community consistently enhances articles, contrary to my initial belief that widespread Wikipedia editing undermined reliability. In conclusion, editing Wikipedia has been a positive and beneficial experience. I have had the chance to contribute to articles that have been viewed by over a million people since my edits. Moreover, I have learned to view Wikipedia in a whole new light. I have rid myself of any prejudices against Wikipedia instilled in me by my previous instructors. Also, I learned that I can use Wikipedia to find more reliable sources for my research. Lastly, I have gained a new appreciation and understanding of the value of citations and neutral-toned writing.
8. @121solstice-storm: Before enrolling in this class and becoming a Wikipedia editor, I believed that Wikipedia was an awful website to use for research because that’s what people had told me. For years, teachers have expressed to me that Wikipedia is untrustworthy and Wikipedia articles are riddled with false information because anyone can edit the site. The only “acceptable” sites I could reference in an academic setting were credible, well-established websites like those that end in .gov or .edu. After becoming a Wikipedian, I discovered that Wikipedia was a good source of information due to how diligent the editors are. I also found the value of being a part of something bigger than yourself. This experience has taught me that even something as small as making a grammatical correction can have a significant impact, and I know that idea will inspire me for the rest of my life.
9. @Alex T: This project was overall a very fun experience for me as I have never edited a Wikipedia page before nor knew how to edit one. I honestly did not know that a regular student had permissions to be able to edit a Wikipedia page. I had trouble figuring out how to actually edit the articles and add the sources themselves, but with the modules and your help, I was able to figure it out. My favorite article I edited was “On my mama”. Even though most of the edits were just adding the song lyrics, which I was surprised they weren’t on their already, I looked up a lot about the artist, Victoria Monét, and actually wrote one of my reflections on her. It was cool to see that she worked a lot with Ariana Grande and is now doing well with her own singing career. Another one I did was Afro-Punk. It was cool to learn about the origins of it and to see what bands were considered Afro-Punk. I mainly added recent info, like who performed at the last event, but I added another guy who founded Afro-Punk but did not get credit so I put him on there.
10. @Caesar0302: Before becoming a Wikipedian I did not believe that Wikipedia was a reliable source. This was ingrained in me from third grade all the way up college now. Anytime we had to write a paper for class the teacher/professor made sure to emphasize that Wikipedia could not be used as it unreliable because anyone can make edits. After becoming a Wikipedian I know realize that this is the complete opposite. The information that people are editing is backed up by sources and people are not just adding fake information or "fake news". Also edits that people make are reviewed by other editors adding another level of peer review. Going forward now I won't be scared to visit Wikipedia and use the information it provides because I now know that this information is accurate and reliable.
11. @Nini209 Before becoming a Wikipedian, I had a limited understanding of the collaborative nature of online content creation. after I immersed myself in the Wikipedia community, I learned the significance of fact-checking, neutrality and the power of collective knowledge. This experience expanded my perspective on accessibility of information and the responsibilities that come with it. Making my first edit on Wikipedia was initially daunting, fearing potential errors. However as time progressed I gained confidence and realized the importance of my contributions. Editing black music articles provided valuable insights into the underrepresentation of Black musical contributions. I gained an understanding of the importance of inclusivity for cultural history and for diverse perspectives.
12. @kylaalexander Growing up, I never used Wikipedia because I was taught it wasn't a reliable source. I generally would use it to find articles on something if I couldn't find it on my own. I learned throughout this process that Wikipedia is a worldwide collaboration providing essential and verifiable information. It was a weird experience because of my upbringing, but it definitely changed my mind.-</nowiki>
13. @Ysaka2503 Before becoming a Wikipedian I always knew that Wikipedia was peer edited. I was aware that there was different people creating these articles, however, I was always discouraged from using it as a reliable source. I was told it was "unreliable" or "untrustworthy" or "not accurate". However, after personally editing two articles and seeing how much research goes into it, I can confindently say it is reliable. This experience opened my eyes to how much information and knowledge Wikipedia really has to provide. I editited two articles, one on "Henry William Johnson" and the other on "Portia K. Maultsby" and I was scared that my writing would ruin an artitlce. However, I gained confidence as I continued to edit and saw that I was capable of creating valuable knowledge for others.
14. @clariwyd: My favorite thing about editing Wikipedia was realizing that everything I had previously thought I knew about Wikipedia was wrong. I was told that it was an unreliable source that could not be used as a citation in a body of academic work. However, after taking the time to do careful research before making an edit to an article, I have learned that Wikipedia is a great resource for additional sources. By editing Wikipedia articles, I have learned so much more about Beyonce and her artistry than I would have ever known if I had not done the research for the article I edited, The Cultural Impact of Beyonce. It was also interesting to learn about how under-edited some articles about black artists were, such as Willie Dixon. I like that you allowed us to discover and give these artists the careful attention they deserve while also providing us with research skills.
15. @claratin.nondrowsy: As a Black editor on Wikipedia, the journey of editing pages for indie black music artists, such as Baby Rose, takes on a profound significance. Beyond the simple act of updating information, it becomes a meaningful endeavor to reclaim and amplify Black culture within the digital landscape. Baby Rose, like many other talented artists, deserves a Wikipedia page that reflects the depth of her contributions to the music industry. By enhancing and diversifying these pages, I aim to contribute to a more accurate representation of Black artists and their impact on the music scene. It's about recognizing and celebrating the richness of Black culture, ensuring that these artists' stories are told with the nuance and authenticity they deserve. While facing challenges, such as finding suitable images within copyright guidelines, the commitment to highlighting and reclaiming Black culture remains a driving force behind my contributions as a Black editor on Wikipedia.

Links I find useful for my WikiEdu Projects

• Wikipedia:Dashboard
• Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora
• Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/AfroCrowd/Lists of Articles
• Category:Pages with broken reference names
• Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit
• Category:Wikipedia requested videos
• Category:Wikipedia requested photographs
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Fix common mistakes
• Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests
• Category:Orphaned articles
• Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links
• Category:Articles with dead external links
• Move to Commons: priority candidates and human-reviewed, and Commons Helper
• Category:Articles needing translation from foreign-language Wikipedias
• User:Rosiestep/Gender Gap (articles about women needing translation to English)
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Women writers/Missing articles (H/T to User talk:Mx. Granger)

Ill Doctrine: The Myth of Believing in NPOV