Revision as of 04:19, 26 June 2013 view sourceBiolprof (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,068 edits →How to deal with a class editing an article in a negative manner← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 14:12, 29 December 2024 view source Notcharizard (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers11,408 edits →Teahouse query from Italian university class: ReplyTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<noinclude>{{ |
<noinclude>{{/Header}} | ||
{{Template:Active editnotice}} | |||
<!-- | |||
template:User:MiszaBot/config | |||
|archiveheader = {{Education noticeboard navbox all}} | |||
|maxarchivesize = 400K | |||
|counter = 3 | |||
|minthreadsleft = 0 | |||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
|algo = old(15d) | |||
|archive = Misplaced Pages:Education noticeboard/Archive%(counter)d | |||
--> | |||
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | ||
|header={{ |
|header={{aan}} | ||
|archiveprefix=Misplaced Pages:Education noticeboard/Archive | |archiveprefix=Misplaced Pages:Education noticeboard/Archive | ||
|format=%%i | |format= %%i | ||
|age= |
|age=720 | ||
|numberstart=14 | |||
|index=no | |||
|archivenow=<nowiki>{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}}</nowiki> | |||
|numberstart=3 | |||
|minkeepthreads= 4 | |minkeepthreads= 4 | ||
|maxarchsize= |
|maxarchsize= 150000 | ||
}}<!-- | }}<!-- | ||
---------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- | ||
New entries go down at the *BOTTOM* of the page, not here. | New entries go down at the *BOTTOM* of the page, not here. | ||
---------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------- | ||
--></noinclude> |
--></noinclude> | ||
<!-- PLEASE DO NOT EDIT ABOVE THIS LINE --> | |||
== Request for ''course instructor'' right: ] (]) == | |||
== Best Practices for Teaching Students to Write Effective Lead Sections == | |||
; Name | |||
Guy Boysen | |||
Hello everyone, | |||
; Institution | |||
McKendree University | |||
I am an instructor guiding students in composing medical articles for Misplaced Pages. Currently, I am focused on updating our guidelines and have several questions that I hope you can help with. My questions here are generic questions concerning the lead section. | |||
; Course title and description | |||
The course in a section of Honors Introduction to Psychology. Students will primarily be in their first year of college. As part of their community service requirements, students will be writing a Misplaced Pages article that increases accurate coverage of psychology. They will be primarily writing about classic studies in the history of psychology. | |||
In our academic setting, we emphasize the importance of supporting claims with citations, and our grading reflects this by marking down submissions that lack adequate citations. However, the ] suggests that while the lead should be well-sourced, citations are commonly found in the body of the article rather than the lead. | |||
; Assignment plan | |||
The following is a current draft of their assignment: | |||
Q1: Are we being too stringent expecting our students to include citations in the lead section since this is not an expectation from Misplaced Pages? Is it a major problem if they do provide citations throughout the lead? What justification can we provide for not including citations in this section? | |||
The Association for Psychological Science (APS) has initiated an effort to improve the representation of psychology on Misplaced Pages in terms of both its accuracy and comprehensiveness. Intentional, thoughtful, and scholarly contribution to Misplaced Pages represents an opportunity for service because it can increase the quality and amount of scientific information available to the general public. The contributions also offer students the opportunity to refine their communication skills by translating complicated scientific concepts into everyday language. | |||
My second question is on structuring. We currently teach our students that the lead section should not only summarise the main content but also reflect the order of that content as presented in the body of the article. We use Misplaced Pages's "featured articles" as exemplars and models for this. However, we recognise that Misplaced Pages articles are subject to ongoing edits and updates that may shift the content and structure over time. This dynamic nature can lead to discrepancies between the lead and the body of an article, especially if the lead does not consistently mirror updates made to the article's main content. | |||
Students will sign up for one of the 40 studies in the Hock text. They will then review the Misplaced Pages article devoted to that study or a closely related topic and determine the strengths and weaknesses of the article. Then, they will identify topics that could be added to make the Misplaced Pages coverage of their topic more comprehensive. Building off their review, students will actually write a Misplaced Pages article based on their suggestion for an area in need of increased coverage. Articles must be written so that they are comprehensible to the general public. Articles must be written using reliable, scholarly sources. All sources must be documented both in the text and in a reference section. The length of articles will vary. However, if the article does not reach 300 words and 2 sources, a second article should be written. | |||
Given this: | |||
The written assignment that is turned in will consist of two parts. The first part will include the review of the Misplaced Pages page. Reviews should contain strengths, limitations, and specific suggestions for expansion. The second part will consist of the actual article written for Misplaced Pages. | |||
Q1: Are we guiding students correctly on the arrangement and order of information in the lead? | |||
; Number of students | |||
20 | |||
Q2: When significant changes are made to the body of an article, is it a common or recommended practice to revise the lead accordingly to ensure it remains an accurate and concise summary of the article and mirrors the order of the content? | |||
; Start and end dates | |||
9/2013-12/2013 | |||
Thank you in advance for your advice and suggestions! ] (]) 01:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
<!--The above code will leave your signature at the end of your request.--> | |||
:@] I personally enjoy the essay ], I highly suggest you take a look at it as it covers a lot of these smaller details. In general if content is sourced in the body of the article it does not need to be cited in the lead. The exeption to this is controversial material. However quite a few medical articles will have citations in the lead because pretty much anything in the feild of medicine can be considered controverial in a way. As far as order I do typically follow the order of the body of the article but I don't think that is a strict rule. If siginificant changes are made to the body the lead should reflect that as well. ] (]) 02:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Firstly, thanks for the link! We've had disagreements as teachers about what we mark down re citations. We understand that citations are required if the points being made are controversial but alas it's not always easy to identify if the content is controversial. So far we have told them, if in doubt, cite! Secondly, I take on board your suggestion regarding stubs. This is something I will bring to the team ] (]) 02:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::I would generally agree that with medical content it's better to cite than not to cite. ] (]) 02:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
: First, your course on medical topics is relevant to two boards, this one, and ], but given that most of your questions are about citations, ] is the governing principle here and this discussion would have been much better placed at ], and not here, in order to get definitive answers to your citation questions. I urge you to move it there (see {{tl|Discussion moved to}}; if you agree to move it but need technical assistance to do so, just ask). | |||
: Briefly: | |||
:* Too stringent? – maybe, but they don't hurt, and no one will complain unless you pile up five at a time. There is no guideline saying you cannot place citations in the lead, so your are not violating anything by doing so. | |||
:* Order: the lead need not follow the same order as the body, though often it does. Editing order is: ] (because it is a summary of the most important points of the body). | |||
:* Discrepancies: Yes, revise the lead after altering the body if the changes there significantly alter the most important points of the body. A great many body edits will not be in this category, and require no changes to the lead. A typical newbie mistake is to head straight for the lead and start altering it (or worse, the ], with no consideration for the body. I have often thought it would be useful to programmatically prohibit lead changes from new users, but there is no general support for that view that I am aware of, though it would save many experienced editors lots of time undoing edits to the lead by new users. | |||
: Think about moving this. ] (]) 05:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
::@] Happy to move this and yes to technical assistance please ] (]) 12:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{discussion moved to|Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine#Best Practices for Teaching Students to Write Effective Lead Sections}} | |||
: <noinclude><!-- ] 17:47, 4 May 2025 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1746380836}} <noinclude>Please add your comments and feedback there, not here (unless specifically relevant to ENB and not ]). Thanks, ] (]) 17:45, 16 October 2024 (UTC)</noinclude> | |||
== Women's Rights Pioneers Monument == | |||
{{Clickable button|]}} | |||
<!--This is a link you can click after you save your request, to return to the training.--> | |||
I think the recent edit history on ] might be some kind of education project. Many of the editors also edited ] in the same one-hour period precisely one week ago. ] (]) 20:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
<!-- ] 16:10, 3 June 2023 (UTC) --> <!--Leave this here. It can be replaced with the ClueBot III/ArchiveNow code when this application is ready to be archived.--> | |||
:If you find out what class they are from, let me know! --] (]) 22:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
*The book referred to, for convenience, is by Roger R. Hock. Here are my thoughts. The fact that this is a small class is very good, as is the fact that it is an honors class. However, there are still a number of ways this could go badly wrong, so it would be helpful if you would make a commitment to work closely with a course ambassador who could advise you on ways to avoid pitfalls that have tripped up other instructors. ] (]) 17:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
:I believe it's the same group of students that have been editing '']'' for an English class, though I'm not sure from which school. One left me the most recent message on my talk page. ] (]) 20:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Group accounts created for ] == | |||
*I would gladly work with an ambassador and would love to hear advice an lessons learned that are not part of the official educational materials posted on here or on the APS website. Is there something I need to do to make this happen? ] (]) 17:25, 18 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
{{yo|Ian (Wiki Ed)|Helaine (Wiki Ed)}} | |||
::I would be happy to talk with you over Skype. Last semester I helped out most closely with ] and before that ]. I'll send you an email. ] (]) 11:25, 21 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
I was looking around at ] and noticed that it appeared to have been edited by a classroom group account. Misplaced Pages's ] prohibits the creation accounts with names that imply shared use, and our ] prohibits the sharing of any account by multiple people. Looking more broadly at the course, the following usernames appear to be accounts in clear violation of the aforementioned policy: | |||
== Status=passed == | |||
*{{checkuser|Group 6 E102 2024}} | |||
Is this meant to be 'past'? If this is some regional English use of the word 'passed', could we instead use the word 'historic' or the word 'archived'? It's too close to the sense of 'the students passed the course' ] (]) 10:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
*{{checkuser|Group12e102}} | |||
:The meaning is intended more like "the time period of this course has passed", but I agree that it's a bit confusing. Maybe 'previous'? Anyone else have ideas for the clearest word to label courses that are over?--] (]) 12:41, 21 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
*{{checkuser|Group4E102}} | |||
::Maybe "finished"? --] (]) 13:55, 21 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
*{{checkuser|E102RealGroup11}} | |||
:::Maybe the new name (whatever it is) could be linked to the definitions of the stages someplace? ] (]) 09:09, 22 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
*{{checkuser|E102Group7}} | |||
*{{checkuser|E102Group3}} | |||
I am a bit loath to block these accounts right before the course deadline of 3 December, so I won't at this moment. That being said, any administrator who encounters these accounts in the wild might block them on sight. | |||
It's really common for professors to assign group work, and small group work has pedagogical value (as ). But I do think that we might have a bit of a gap in training materials; the doesn't mention anything about shared accounts/username policy, and I don't really see this sort of thing explicitly highlighted in the either (though, in both cases, it's possible I've missed something). | |||
==How to deal with a class editing an article in a negative manner== | |||
Back in May of 2013 we had 3 new users and an IP making negative changes to the article on ]. I reverted the changes, protected the page and posted a comment here were the protect was supported. Subsequent to this some feel that my protection of this article was a misuse of admin tools . A number of us attempted to address a class editing ] without protection and it was difficult in May of 2012 (there were five new editors). I ended up protecting that page as well eventually. Wondering what we as a community feel is appropriate when dealing with classes who are making negative changes to an article? Do people feel protection is appropriate and if so can this be done by those who have previously edited the article in question? ] (] · ] · ]) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 17:50, 24 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
:I personally feel that when you are acting in the capacity of maintainer of medical articles, and the issue is one of competence, this sort of protection is completely appropriate. What is happening here is that you've gotten sucked into controversies that have nothing to do with education or medicine, and the other parties are looking around for any stick to beat you with. ] (]) 18:11, 24 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks. However if I am to carry out these sorts of actions in the future will need a clear consensus that this is indeed appropriate. ] (] · ] · ]) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 18:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
:I too feel that relatively long-standing editors of relatively high-profile articles can and should take action to prevent detrimental editing during hotspots of activity. This is what we do, for example, in the cases of politician biographies in the climax of election campaigns; rapidly moving disaster articles; etc; etc. I see no difference here. ] (]) 20:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
Do either of these trainings explicitly inform students or professors that they should not create accounts that are shared between multiple individuals? And, if not, would you be willing to add a module to them explaining this? I'd be happy to draft up a short paragraph for you if you'd like to create a module. | |||
:I'd be happier if we were having this discussion in the absence of an RfArb. I've looked at that request, and I think that it's a good decision that they appear to be declining to accept the case. On the merits of the question asked here, I have ambivalent feelings: on the one hand, I've been very outspoken on this noticeboard about the importance of not leaving unhelpful student edits on-Wiki; on the other hand, I'm also a long-time advocate of administrative caution. So I'm going to break the question down into two sub-questions. As to the sub-question of whether page protection can be desirable when a student project is messing up a page, I say yes, it is. I would also, however, want to see an initial effort to explain the problem to the student editors, accompanied by reverting if appropriate, before resorting to protection. In other words, BRD, at least briefly, before protecting, so as not to BITE. The second sub-question is whether or not it is appropriate for an administrator to protect a page after having made other directly-related edits, such as reverting the edits that the protection is intended to block. I'd say that doing that flirts with being on the wrong side of INVOLVED. And I prefer that administrators err on the side of not projecting big-shot-ness (for much the same reason that I avoid telling other editors in a content dispute that I have a PhD, so ]). As a non-admin, I have never found RFPP particularly onerous. I see no reason why it would be any more onerous for an admin. You can always post there, just like any other editor, and there will always be other admins who can do the protection for you. So, on that second sub-question, I disagree a bit with Looie and Stuart. If you come across a problem page that you otherwise do not edit, by all means consider protection (after BRD) against bad student edits. If you have edited the page previously, but have not involved yourself in dealing with the student edits, then protection is also fine. But once you've gotten to the point of reverting the student edits, it's better to leave protection to a completely uninvolved admin. --] (]) 22:01, 25 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
::Rereadig my comments above, it appears I have implied I'm an admin. I'm not. Also my take on my PhD in relation to wikipedia is that my PhD is just another insititution I have to declare a COI with (See ]). ] (]) 23:15, 25 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::Oh, not at all. I didn't think any of that at all. I just was trying to draw some distinctions concerning what I consider to be proper administrative practice. --] (]) 23:18, 25 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
:I’m responding to this as a course instructor with only a vague understanding of admin rights and responsibilities. As an instructor, I feel a strong responsibility to have my students improve articles and not damage them. Even so, I am often too busy during the semester to keep up with their edits and after lurking on this page a bit, I see not all instructors share my sense of responsibility even if they did have the time. That being said, if it were my students, I would request, first, BRD but please don’t BITE. Second, please try to contact me and my course ambassador (my students are required to put a link to the course page on the article talk page and on their user page, so it should be easy to find us). Beyond that, if bad student edits continue in spite of efforts to communicate the problem to the students, their instructor, and ambassador (if there is one), then page protection seems very appropriate. Tryptofish’s comments seem thoughtful and make sense to me, but I am unfamiliar with the page protection process. ] (]) 04:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
— ] <sub>]</sub> 21:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Request for ''course instructor'' right: ] (]) == | |||
:<small>As a note, the ] also has a similar issue, with accounts like {{no ping|E102Group5}}, {{no ping|E102GROUP6}}, {{no ping|E102group17}}, {{no ping|E102Group11}}, {{no ping|Raiuigroup20}}, {{no ping|2024E102Group19}}, {{no ping|E102team1}}, and {{no ping|Team12E102F}}. I don't think this changes much substantially other than identifying that it isn't just one professor who has had this issue, but I'll include it for completeness's sake. — ] <sub>]</sub> 21:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
; Name | |||
::Thanks for the ping @]. The message at sign-up for students says: | |||
Vanessa Bentley | |||
::{{tq|Hello! You’ve been invited to join . To join, you need to log in with a Misplaced Pages account. If you don’t have a Misplaced Pages account yet, sign up for one now. Your username can be as anonymous — or as personally identifying — as you wish. (Shared accounts are not allowed.)}} | |||
::I'm pretty sure there are other places where we tell students to be more private in their username selection, and tell instructors that shared accounts aren't allowed. But I'd have to talk to Helaine and Sage to figure out where specifically that is. | |||
; Institution | |||
University of Cincinnati | |||
::As far as the accounts go, it doesn't look like anyone in or has edited in the last two weeks, so I'm hoping they are done. That said, there is often someone who decides they want to try to do the assignment at the last possible moment, but a block that forced them to get in touch with me and figure out what the cause it might not be a bad idea. | |||
; Course title and description | |||
The course is Philosophy and Women. We are investigating the relationship between women and philosophy from Ancient Greece through today. It is a mixed undergraduate course where most have little to no experience in philosophy. Their Misplaced Pages assignment is to research a woman philosopher and write a Misplaced Pages page for her to increase the visibility of women philosophers. I do not yet have a Misplaced Pages advisor for the course. | |||
::I was going to say it's better to wait, but I think I'll block these accounts now. ] (]) 01:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
; Assignment plan | |||
:::For what it's worth, the community has already stated at the information page that shared accounts should not be used; see ]. Of course, this isn't the same thing as WikiEd training materials. --] (]) 22:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
My students will be adding articles by women working in philosophy to increase the visibility of women;s contributions to philosophy. Each student will be tasked with adding one article. | |||
== Yet another class creating promotional articles == | |||
; Number of students | |||
18 | |||
] was created by students from and is a hopelessly promotional article (though they have toned it down slightly since I tagged it, after initially edit-warring to remove the tag). I looked through other edits from the class and the same problem happened at ], ] (though to a lesser extent), ], ], and ] -- pretty much every article the class was involved with. This seems to be a systemic problem with student projects (almost every class project I've run across has had at least some students adding promo/puffery), and there's a clear need for much better training and/or proactive monitoring to make sure student editors are following ] and ] -- I know I've reported several very similar problems here, and there are others that I haven't bothered to report. ''':Jay8g''' <small>]•]•]<nowiki />]</small> 19:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
; Start and end dates | |||
June 24-August 10, 2013 | |||
:I wonder if we should provide clearer options to ''editors'' dealing with student assignments. It's very frequent that student editors come onwiki, (usually unknowingly) go against a policy or guideline, and end up with a dispute. | |||
<!--leave the following in code in place when you submit your application; it will send notifications to users who can respond to your request.--> | |||
:Currently, "Communicating with Others on Misplaced Pages" assumes that editors will give specific feedback to the student on what to change. However, that's more difficult for an article like ] where the issues aren't simply "change x to y", or when multiple students in a course have an issue with promotional phrasing. | |||
{{ping|OhanaUnited|Neelix|Ktr101|Pharos|Pongr}} | |||
:The status quo appears to be "write something to Wiki Ed on the Education Noticeboard and hope they discuss it with the instructor", but is there a better way? Perhaps editors should have a more structured way to give feedback on courses akin to course evaluations. <span class="nowrap">] (]) <small>(please ] me on reply)</small></span> 02:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{ping|Sleuthwood|Etlib|Daniel Simanek|Biosthmors|Kayz911}} | |||
::{{re|Chess}} It's a lot to ask of editors. I suppose it might not hurt to create "tips for responding to student editors", but some people would definitely respond with "I'm not here to be your free TA" (and they wouldn't be wrong). | |||
{{ping|DStrassmann|Rjensen|Bluerasberry|Kevin Gorman}} | |||
::The onus on us to do a better job in terms of building better systems and guardrails. We are experimenting, there are a lot of changes I'd love to try if I had more time, but I'm always interested in other ideas. ] (]) 16:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
--] (]) 19:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
:::This follows quite closely from what Ian just said, but ] does contain advice of this sort. But for the more specific issue of evaluating courses, that strikes me as something potentially useful. For now, it would seem like the main option is for editors, and not just limited to WikiEd people, to leave comments on the instructor's talk page. Of course, the instructor might respond with something like "it's not my professional responsibility to care what some random person on Misplaced Pages thinks", but once they have decided to make use of us as a teaching tool for their class, that makes them responsible to our policies, whether they like it or not – and ''that'' leads back to this noticeboard, if not ANI. --] (]) 00:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
<!--The above code will leave your signature at the end of your request.--> | |||
:::{{re|Ian (Wiki Ed)}} It's beneficial to distinguish between informal and formal advice. Informal advice is me suggesting a course should teach students about promotional language or venting to you about how a course is being run. Formal advice is me setting specific expectations because I'm unhappy with a course's impact on-wiki. When I give informal advice, I might want Wiki Education to present that feedback in a non-confrontational way. When I give formal advice, I'm looking for clear commitments that certain behaviour won't happen again. | |||
:::I would give informal advice to other editors on their user talk pages and give formal advice at ANI. The education noticeboard tries to deal with informal and formal advice in one place and I don't think that's working. The structure of a noticeboard incentivizes formal advice, but privately bringing up concerns to the professor is a response one would take for informal advice. This mismatch might be why editors are feeling unheard. <span class="nowrap">] (]) <small>(please ] me on reply)</small></span> 08:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:{{re|Jay8g}} I wouldn't say it's a systemic problems with student work (it's a small portion of the ~4,000 articles edited this term) but yes, there's too much promotional language here. Creating bios is hard for new editors because they are writing about people they feel are cool or interesting (just look at the torrent of stuff on AFC or Cat:CSD). We depend on our training and reminders from instructors to counter this urge. And after you've done it for many years like this professor has, sometimes a reminder is needed. I will email the professor today. ] (]) 16:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Students asking at RSN as part of an assignment == | |||
There appears to be a student assignment to discuss the reliability of a Korean-language source at ]. An example of such a thread is ] and has some discussion about the course itself. <span class="nowrap">] (]) <small>(please ] me on reply)</small></span> 02:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{Clickable button|]}} | |||
<!--This is a link you can click after you save your request, to return to the training.--> | |||
:Piotr has been running assignments on Misplaced Pages longer than Wiki Education has existed, probably longer than this noticeboard has. I'd agree with what you said there, except that I think "we" (the predecessors of Wiki Education) learned a lot about the Misplaced Pages assignment from Piotr, back in the old days. ] (]) 15:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
<!-- ] 19:24, 22 June 2023 (UTC) --> <!--Leave this here. It can be replaced with the ClueBot III/ArchiveNow code when this application is ready to be archived.--> | |||
== Having some trouble with a class == | |||
Hello, | |||
<small> I initially posted this to ], who recommended that I come here.</small> | |||
I am having some issues with students in adding semi-sourced edits to ] and ] and wanted to know if there was some way to escalate the situation if any more disruptive material is added to other articles. | |||
I checked some more diffs of people in the class, and they are better than nothing, but still add a lot of biased, semi-cited material to the pages. | |||
Example diffs from other articles, found from Students -> random student -> article -> history: | |||
* https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Foster_care&diff=1261524664&oldid=1255402058 | |||
* https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Transgender_pregnancy&diff=1261160646&oldid=1248453970 | |||
] (]) | :) | he/him | 07:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:There's also a lot of unsourced editing going on here, and - sorry to be the bearer of bad news, @] -- some of this gives off chatGPT vibes. -- ] (]) 12:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks {{u|JuxtaposedJacob}}, Looks like the main problems are two students - {{noping|Zoecosgrove}} and {{noping|Michigan2020}}. If the class wasn't finished yesterday I'd definitely ask them to stop editing. Beyond that there are some ] issues that I need to follow up on. I'll get in touch with the instructor. | |||
::I agree that feels like AI. I wish they were either drafting on-wiki or editing live, it's this kind of in-between stuff that always makes me fear the worst. ] (]) 20:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Bluegrass music in Europe (wikiedu.org course) == | |||
Hi folks, | |||
'''Linked course:''' | |||
'''Article''': ] | |||
One of the article authors came into the IRC Live Help chat asking how this article could be published - they'd already (malformed) moved it from Sandbox to Mainspace, but I wasn't sure it quite met our standards (I wouldn't have accepted it through AfC) and so I and left a message on the ]. | |||
The author unfortunately without explanation soon after and the article has now been tagged with the essay-like maintenance template (one of my original concerns). | |||
After realising it was made via WikiEdu, I don't really want to re-draftify it. Having never worked with edu programmes before, I'm not wholly sure what to do. Maybe it only needs a little cleanup and can stay in mainspace, but... | |||
Pinging @] (the author) and @] who tagged it. <span style="background-color: RoyalBlue; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">''']''' <small>]</small></span> 09:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Another editor in the same class is responsible for ], which I've reverted. Pinging @] and @], looks like this class needs some help. -- ] (]) 11:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks @] and @]. I've contacted the instructor to loop him in on those problems and offer help. If the student doesn't clean up the 'bluegrass in Europe' article soon, I'll plan to copyedit it next week; I think there's enough of a core to keep as an article, if the writing problems are fixed. ] (]) 17:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Non-neutral AfC submission, "instructor is insisting on a Misplaced Pages page" as a template == | |||
I recently declined ] as reading more like an essay than an encyclopedia article, but {{IP|103.176.11.112}} wrote the following on the talk page of {{user|Jamesmadison551}}: | |||
<blockquote>I just need to make a Misplaced Pages page for my school project. My instructor is insisting on a Misplaced Pages page as it's template. If you can provide assistance regarding this, I would appreciate it.</blockquote> | |||
I do not have experience regarding people creating articles for school projects, which is what brings me here. ]<sub>]<sub>]</sub></sub> (]/]) 01:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:''sigh'' nearly 7 million articles and they have to get tasked with ''creating'' a new one. They need to get a new teacher. ] (]) 12:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::Well, I'm not sure it's the instructor that's to blame, given the strong, strong LLM vibes on this submission. Students who pull out chatGPT to complete their assignments don't tend to be great at following instructions. -- ] (]) 20:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:::My comment was more because I have seen so many profs over the years ''insisting'' that their students write a full article (leading to garbage like this because the student panics) when there are just so many stubs that could use improving instead. ] (]) 20:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::This is one of the benefits of working with us; instructors often want students to write a new article because it's easier to see what they've done, then, vs it can be challenging to understand a diff unless you're well-versed in wikicode. Wiki Education's Dashboard software has an authorship highlighting feature that shows instructors exactly what students did, so this helps alleviate that problem. More than 90% of our participant work on existing articles, and those that do create new articles, it's often biographies of underrepresented people, and we spend a fair amount of time on notability to head off obvious problems. Please do feel free to send any students to us; we're happy to help get their instructors in our program. --] (]) 16:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks, {{u|JJPMaster}}! I left a note for the student too, hopefully they'll ask their instructor to get in touch with Wiki Education; we can help them design a better assignment that works for Misplaced Pages. I agree this one was not it! --] (]) 16:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Teahouse query from Italian university class == | |||
If the LIUC University is ], a student has requested help at ]. I know WikiEd may not be able to help, so I thought I'd at least notify any interested parties. ''Please respond there if possible, not here''. Thank you, ] (] '''·''' ]) 21:54, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Pinging {{ping|Ferdi2005}} in case this is something Wikimedia Italia can help with. --] (]) 21:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:No further action needed, just courtesy links to ] and ] from two more LIUC students. At this point, not much to be done except keeping an eye on the students; one of them intends to ] from the Teahouse hosts to the instructor. ] (] '''·''' ]) 04:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:. <span style="background-color: RoyalBlue; border-radius: 1em; padding: 3px 3px 3px 3px;">''']''' <small>]</small></span> 16:33, 20 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::That one is ] (all caps original). Also linking even more Teahouse questions, ]. One before it, ] (lowercase "i") implies the course is https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/LIUC_-_Universit%C3%A0_Cattaneo/Digital_Technology_(October_-_December,_2024). ] (] '''·''' ]) 19:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::And another ]. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Sudden spate of userspace school essays with AI art == | |||
There is a ] on the ] that is relevant to Wiki Ed. ]<sub>]<sub>]</sub></sub> (]/]) 23:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Disruptive, possibly automated edits to talk pages originating from this project. == | |||
Hi -- since late 2021, there has been an absolutely rampant problem with unconstructive edits made to talk pages, and several of them seem to originate with this program. Some relevant diffs can be seen ]. This is a small sample I happen to have around -- I have been reverting them when possible, but unfortunately if they are not caught before the archive bot then they're stuck there forever thanks to ]. | |||
These edits often, but not always, follow a pattern and are thus easy to find. They are usually on pages related to school curriculum and usually they come from IPs. Their header is a subject area, e.g., "Math," and the text is something unconstructive, e.g., "English" or "Difine governance with Example." It's not quite the same issue as ], as the edits are far more nonsensical and fragmented, and lack even the marginal usefulness those had. Sometimes they seem to be exam questions or prompts, e.g., "Tick the correct answer". | |||
I suspect that many of these originate with text-to-speech or LLMs given the date they started pouring in (GPT-3 released 2020). And I do mean pouring in, like from a couple dozen to thousands. (It's possible that this was still really common before 2021 and people just caught them already, but I doubt that because the pattern of undetected vandalism/test edits on talk pages is usually the opposite, i.e., the majority of unreverted vandalism/unconstructive edits to talk pages are from 2006-2010, with the exception of this stuff.) | |||
Is there any way to stop this? Obviously we can't control people's behavior, but the pattern of these edits is so regular that it seems like something automated might be causing it. ] (]) 18:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:@] These don't look like the kinds of edits I see student editors making - if it was coming from them, I imagine there would be a mixture of logged-in and IP edits of this type. I just don't see student editors logging out specifically to make these kinds of edits. ] (]) 19:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
::That makes sense, thanks! It's a much broader problem than just school-related articles. A lot of them do seem to be pretty clearly related to class assignments though and/or are on pages with the "this page was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation" notice, so I just wanted to flag it just in case. (edit) ] is a good example of what I mean, "today's lesson." | |||
::IP edits seem to be much more common than logged-in users although I do see them from logged-in accounts occasionally. | |||
] (]) 19:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 14:12, 29 December 2024
Noticeboards | |
---|---|
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes. | |
General | |
Articles, content | |
Page handling | |
User conduct | |
Other | |
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards |
Purpose of this page | Using this page | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
This page is for discussion related to student assignments and the Misplaced Pages Education Program. Please feel free to post, whether you're from a class, a potential class, or if you're a Misplaced Pages editor. Topics for this board might include:
There are other pages more appropriate for dealing with certain specific issues:
|
Shortcuts
Managing threads If you'd like to make sure a thread does not get archived automatically after 30 days, use {{Do not archive until}} at the top of the section. Use {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveNow}} within a section to have it archived (more or less) immediately. A brief Archives page lists them with the years in which those now inactive discussions took place.
| ||||||||
Archives |
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Best Practices for Teaching Students to Write Effective Lead Sections
Hello everyone,
I am an instructor guiding students in composing medical articles for Misplaced Pages. Currently, I am focused on updating our guidelines and have several questions that I hope you can help with. My questions here are generic questions concerning the lead section.
In our academic setting, we emphasize the importance of supporting claims with citations, and our grading reflects this by marking down submissions that lack adequate citations. However, the Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style/Lead section suggests that while the lead should be well-sourced, citations are commonly found in the body of the article rather than the lead.
Q1: Are we being too stringent expecting our students to include citations in the lead section since this is not an expectation from Misplaced Pages? Is it a major problem if they do provide citations throughout the lead? What justification can we provide for not including citations in this section?
My second question is on structuring. We currently teach our students that the lead section should not only summarise the main content but also reflect the order of that content as presented in the body of the article. We use Misplaced Pages's "featured articles" as exemplars and models for this. However, we recognise that Misplaced Pages articles are subject to ongoing edits and updates that may shift the content and structure over time. This dynamic nature can lead to discrepancies between the lead and the body of an article, especially if the lead does not consistently mirror updates made to the article's main content.
Given this:
Q1: Are we guiding students correctly on the arrangement and order of information in the lead?
Q2: When significant changes are made to the body of an article, is it a common or recommended practice to revise the lead accordingly to ensure it remains an accurate and concise summary of the article and mirrors the order of the content?
Thank you in advance for your advice and suggestions! G.J.ThomThom (talk) 01:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- @G.J.ThomThom I personally enjoy the essay Misplaced Pages:How to create and manage a good lead section, I highly suggest you take a look at it as it covers a lot of these smaller details. In general if content is sourced in the body of the article it does not need to be cited in the lead. The exeption to this is controversial material. However quite a few medical articles will have citations in the lead because pretty much anything in the feild of medicine can be considered controverial in a way. As far as order I do typically follow the order of the body of the article but I don't think that is a strict rule. If siginificant changes are made to the body the lead should reflect that as well. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, thanks for the link! We've had disagreements as teachers about what we mark down re citations. We understand that citations are required if the points being made are controversial but alas it's not always easy to identify if the content is controversial. So far we have told them, if in doubt, cite! Secondly, I take on board your suggestion regarding stubs. This is something I will bring to the team G.J.ThomThom (talk) 02:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- I would generally agree that with medical content it's better to cite than not to cite. IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:39, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, thanks for the link! We've had disagreements as teachers about what we mark down re citations. We understand that citations are required if the points being made are controversial but alas it's not always easy to identify if the content is controversial. So far we have told them, if in doubt, cite! Secondly, I take on board your suggestion regarding stubs. This is something I will bring to the team G.J.ThomThom (talk) 02:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- First, your course on medical topics is relevant to two boards, this one, and wP:MEDRS, but given that most of your questions are about citations, WP:MEDRS is the governing principle here and this discussion would have been much better placed at WT:MEDRS, and not here, in order to get definitive answers to your citation questions. I urge you to move it there (see {{Discussion moved to}}; if you agree to move it but need technical assistance to do so, just ask).
- Briefly:
- Too stringent? – maybe, but they don't hurt, and no one will complain unless you pile up five at a time. There is no guideline saying you cannot place citations in the lead, so your are not violating anything by doing so.
- Order: the lead need not follow the same order as the body, though often it does. Editing order is: body first, lead second (because it is a summary of the most important points of the body).
- Discrepancies: Yes, revise the lead after altering the body if the changes there significantly alter the most important points of the body. A great many body edits will not be in this category, and require no changes to the lead. A typical newbie mistake is to head straight for the lead and start altering it (or worse, the lead sentence, with no consideration for the body. I have often thought it would be useful to programmatically prohibit lead changes from new users, but there is no general support for that view that I am aware of, though it would save many experienced editors lots of time undoing edits to the lead by new users.
- Think about moving this. Mathglot (talk) 05:36, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Mathglot Happy to move this and yes to technical assistance please G.J.ThomThom (talk) 12:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Please add your comments and feedback there, not here (unless specifically relevant to ENB and not WP:MED). Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 17:45, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Women's Rights Pioneers Monument
I think the recent edit history on Women's Rights Pioneers Monument might be some kind of education project. Many of the editors also edited Misplaced Pages:Sandbox in the same one-hour period precisely one week ago. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- If you find out what class they are from, let me know! --LiAnna (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
- I believe it's the same group of students that have been editing The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives for an English class, though I'm not sure from which school. One left me the most recent message on my talk page. Mellamelina (talk) 20:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Group accounts created for Misplaced Pages:Wiki Ed/North Carolina State University/Engineering in the 21st Century - Section 002 (Fall 2024)
@Ian (Wiki Ed) and Helaine (Wiki Ed):
I was looking around at Offshore wind power in the United States and noticed that it appeared to have been edited by a classroom group account. Misplaced Pages's username policy prohibits the creation accounts with names that imply shared use, and our sockpuppetry policy prohibits the sharing of any account by multiple people. Looking more broadly at the course, the following usernames appear to be accounts in clear violation of the aforementioned policy:
- Group 6 E102 2024 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Group12e102 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Group4E102 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- E102RealGroup11 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- E102Group7 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- E102Group3 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
I am a bit loath to block these accounts right before the course deadline of 3 December, so I won't at this moment. That being said, any administrator who encounters these accounts in the wild might block them on sight.
It's really common for professors to assign group work, and small group work has pedagogical value (as you recognize). But I do think that we might have a bit of a gap in training materials; the student policies training doesn't mention anything about shared accounts/username policy, and I don't really see this sort of thing explicitly highlighted in the new instructor orientation either (though, in both cases, it's possible I've missed something).
Do either of these trainings explicitly inform students or professors that they should not create accounts that are shared between multiple individuals? And, if not, would you be willing to add a module to them explaining this? I'd be happy to draft up a short paragraph for you if you'd like to create a module.
— Red-tailed hawk (nest) 21:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- As a note, the companion section also has a similar issue, with accounts like E102Group5, E102GROUP6, E102group17, E102Group11, Raiuigroup20, 2024E102Group19, E102team1, and Team12E102F. I don't think this changes much substantially other than identifying that it isn't just one professor who has had this issue, but I'll include it for completeness's sake. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 21:24, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping @Red-tailed hawk. The message at sign-up for students says:
Hello! You’ve been invited to join . To join, you need to log in with a Misplaced Pages account. If you don’t have a Misplaced Pages account yet, sign up for one now. Your username can be as anonymous — or as personally identifying — as you wish. (Shared accounts are not allowed.)
- I'm pretty sure there are other places where we tell students to be more private in their username selection, and tell instructors that shared accounts aren't allowed. But I'd have to talk to Helaine and Sage to figure out where specifically that is.
- As far as the accounts go, it doesn't look like anyone in this course or the other one has edited in the last two weeks, so I'm hoping they are done. That said, there is often someone who decides they want to try to do the assignment at the last possible moment, but a block that forced them to get in touch with me and figure out what the cause it might not be a bad idea.
- I was going to say it's better to wait, but I think I'll block these accounts now. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, the community has already stated at the information page that shared accounts should not be used; see WP:STUDENTUSER. Of course, this isn't the same thing as WikiEd training materials. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:45, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
- I was going to say it's better to wait, but I think I'll block these accounts now. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Yet another class creating promotional articles
Alicia Bjarnason was created by students from Earth 209 and is a hopelessly promotional article (though they have toned it down slightly since I tagged it, after initially edit-warring to remove the tag). I looked through other edits from the class and the same problem happened at Wendy Todd, Judi Wakhungu (though to a lesser extent), Karen Hudson-Edwards, Ethel Shakespear, and Karen Hudson-Edwards -- pretty much every article the class was involved with. This seems to be a systemic problem with student projects (almost every class project I've run across has had at least some students adding promo/puffery), and there's a clear need for much better training and/or proactive monitoring to make sure student editors are following WP:NOTPROMO and WP:NPOV -- I know I've reported several very similar problems here, and there are others that I haven't bothered to report. :Jay8g 19:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- I wonder if we should provide clearer options to editors dealing with student assignments. It's very frequent that student editors come onwiki, (usually unknowingly) go against a policy or guideline, and end up with a dispute.
- Currently, "Communicating with Others on Misplaced Pages" assumes that editors will give specific feedback to the student on what to change. However, that's more difficult for an article like Alicia Bjarnason where the issues aren't simply "change x to y", or when multiple students in a course have an issue with promotional phrasing.
- The status quo appears to be "write something to Wiki Ed on the Education Noticeboard and hope they discuss it with the instructor", but is there a better way? Perhaps editors should have a more structured way to give feedback on courses akin to course evaluations. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 02:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Chess: It's a lot to ask of editors. I suppose it might not hurt to create "tips for responding to student editors", but some people would definitely respond with "I'm not here to be your free TA" (and they wouldn't be wrong).
- The onus on us to do a better job in terms of building better systems and guardrails. We are experimenting, there are a lot of changes I'd love to try if I had more time, but I'm always interested in other ideas. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- This follows quite closely from what Ian just said, but WP:NOTTA does contain advice of this sort. But for the more specific issue of evaluating courses, that strikes me as something potentially useful. For now, it would seem like the main option is for editors, and not just limited to WikiEd people, to leave comments on the instructor's talk page. Of course, the instructor might respond with something like "it's not my professional responsibility to care what some random person on Misplaced Pages thinks", but once they have decided to make use of us as a teaching tool for their class, that makes them responsible to our policies, whether they like it or not – and that leads back to this noticeboard, if not ANI. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Ian (Wiki Ed): It's beneficial to distinguish between informal and formal advice. Informal advice is me suggesting a course should teach students about promotional language or venting to you about how a course is being run. Formal advice is me setting specific expectations because I'm unhappy with a course's impact on-wiki. When I give informal advice, I might want Wiki Education to present that feedback in a non-confrontational way. When I give formal advice, I'm looking for clear commitments that certain behaviour won't happen again.
- I would give informal advice to other editors on their user talk pages and give formal advice at ANI. The education noticeboard tries to deal with informal and formal advice in one place and I don't think that's working. The structure of a noticeboard incentivizes formal advice, but privately bringing up concerns to the professor is a response one would take for informal advice. This mismatch might be why editors are feeling unheard. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 08:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Jay8g: I wouldn't say it's a systemic problems with student work (it's a small portion of the ~4,000 articles edited this term) but yes, there's too much promotional language here. Creating bios is hard for new editors because they are writing about people they feel are cool or interesting (just look at the torrent of stuff on AFC or Cat:CSD). We depend on our training and reminders from instructors to counter this urge. And after you've done it for many years like this professor has, sometimes a reminder is needed. I will email the professor today. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Students asking at RSN as part of an assignment
There appears to be a student assignment to discuss the reliability of a Korean-language source at WP:Reliable Sources/Noticeboard. An example of such a thread is Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Is 'hankookilbo(한국일보)' a reliable_press? and has some discussion about the course itself. Chess (talk) (please mention me on reply) 02:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Piotr has been running assignments on Misplaced Pages longer than Wiki Education has existed, probably longer than this noticeboard has. I'd agree with what you said there, except that I think "we" (the predecessors of Wiki Education) learned a lot about the Misplaced Pages assignment from Piotr, back in the old days. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Having some trouble with a class
Hello,
I initially posted this to User talk:Deepfriedokra, who recommended that I come here. I am having some issues with students in this UMich class adding semi-sourced edits to LGBTQ+ media and Media portrayal of LGBTQ people and wanted to know if there was some way to escalate the situation if any more disruptive material is added to other articles.
I checked some more diffs of people in the class, and they are better than nothing, but still add a lot of biased, semi-cited material to the pages. Example diffs from other articles, found from Students -> random student -> article -> history:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Foster_care&diff=1261524664&oldid=1255402058
- https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Transgender_pregnancy&diff=1261160646&oldid=1248453970
JuxtaposedJacob (talk) | :) | he/him | 07:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- There's also a lot of unsourced editing going on here, and - sorry to be the bearer of bad news, @Mossbeach -- some of this gives off chatGPT vibes. -- asilvering (talk) 12:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks JuxtaposedJacob, Looks like the main problems are two students - Zoecosgrove and Michigan2020. If the class wasn't finished yesterday I'd definitely ask them to stop editing. Beyond that there are some WP:MEDRS issues that I need to follow up on. I'll get in touch with the instructor.
- I agree that this edit feels like AI. I wish they were either drafting on-wiki or editing live, it's this kind of in-between stuff that always makes me fear the worst. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:49, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Bluegrass music in Europe (wikiedu.org course)
Hi folks,
Linked course: Bluegrass, Old-Time, and Roots Music History I
Article: Bluegrass music in Europe
One of the article authors came into the IRC Live Help chat asking how this article could be published - they'd already (malformed) moved it from Sandbox to Mainspace, but I wasn't sure it quite met our standards (I wouldn't have accepted it through AfC) and so I draftified it and left a message on the author's Talk page.
The author unfortunately moved it back to mainspace without explanation soon after and the article has now been tagged with the essay-like maintenance template (one of my original concerns).
After realising it was made via WikiEdu, I don't really want to re-draftify it. Having never worked with edu programmes before, I'm not wholly sure what to do. Maybe it only needs a little cleanup and can stay in mainspace, but...
Pinging @Average Archtop Enjoyer (Based) (the author) and @TechnoSquirrel69 who tagged it. qcne (talk) 09:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Another editor in the same class is responsible for Special:Diff/1262200485, which I've reverted. Pinging @Helaine (Wiki Ed) and @Sage (Wiki Ed), looks like this class needs some help. -- asilvering (talk) 11:30, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks @Qcne and @Asilvering. I've contacted the instructor to loop him in on those problems and offer help. If the student doesn't clean up the 'bluegrass in Europe' article soon, I'll plan to copyedit it next week; I think there's enough of a core to keep as an article, if the writing problems are fixed. Sage (Wiki Ed) (talk) 17:42, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Non-neutral AfC submission, "instructor is insisting on a Misplaced Pages page" as a template
I recently declined Draft:CUNYSPS PSY201 Sleep as reading more like an essay than an encyclopedia article, but 103.176.11.112 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) wrote the following on the talk page of Jamesmadison551 (talk · contribs):
I just need to make a Misplaced Pages page for my school project. My instructor is insisting on a Misplaced Pages page as it's template. If you can provide assistance regarding this, I would appreciate it.
I do not have experience regarding people creating articles for school projects, which is what brings me here. JJPMaster (she/they) 01:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- sigh nearly 7 million articles and they have to get tasked with creating a new one. They need to get a new teacher. Primefac (talk) 12:29, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not sure it's the instructor that's to blame, given the strong, strong LLM vibes on this submission. Students who pull out chatGPT to complete their assignments don't tend to be great at following instructions. -- asilvering (talk) 20:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- My comment was more because I have seen so many profs over the years insisting that their students write a full article (leading to garbage like this because the student panics) when there are just so many stubs that could use improving instead. Primefac (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is one of the benefits of working with us; instructors often want students to write a new article because it's easier to see what they've done, then, vs it can be challenging to understand a diff unless you're well-versed in wikicode. Wiki Education's Dashboard software has an authorship highlighting feature that shows instructors exactly what students did, so this helps alleviate that problem. More than 90% of our participant work on existing articles, and those that do create new articles, it's often biographies of underrepresented people, and we spend a fair amount of time on notability to head off obvious problems. Please do feel free to send any students to us; we're happy to help get their instructors in our program. --LiAnna (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:48, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- My comment was more because I have seen so many profs over the years insisting that their students write a full article (leading to garbage like this because the student panics) when there are just so many stubs that could use improving instead. Primefac (talk) 20:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not sure it's the instructor that's to blame, given the strong, strong LLM vibes on this submission. Students who pull out chatGPT to complete their assignments don't tend to be great at following instructions. -- asilvering (talk) 20:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, JJPMaster! I left a note for the student too, hopefully they'll ask their instructor to get in touch with Wiki Education; we can help them design a better assignment that works for Misplaced Pages. I agree this one was not it! --LiAnna (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Teahouse query from Italian university class
If the LIUC University is LIUC Università Carlo Cattaneo, a student has requested help at Misplaced Pages:Teahouse#Draft: May-Li Khoe. I know WikiEd may not be able to help, so I thought I'd at least notify any interested parties. Please respond there if possible, not here. Thank you, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:54, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging @Ferdi2005: in case this is something Wikimedia Italia can help with. --LiAnna (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:59, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- No further action needed, just courtesy links to Misplaced Pages:Teahouse#Suggestions for Monte Zovetto page and #Necropolis of Amorosi from two more LIUC students. At this point, not much to be done except keeping an eye on the students; one of them intends to pass on messages on the course design from the Teahouse hosts to the instructor. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:35, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Another LIUC query from a student here. qcne (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- That one is #DRAFT PAGE UNIVERSITY PROJECT (all caps original). Also linking even more Teahouse questions, #How I can improve my page?. One before it, #How can i improve my page? (lowercase "i") implies the course is https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/LIUC_-_Universit%C3%A0_Cattaneo/Digital_Technology_(October_-_December,_2024). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- And another here. -- NotCharizard 14:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Sudden spate of userspace school essays with AI art
There is a discussion on the Administrators' noticeboard that is relevant to Wiki Ed. JJPMaster (she/they) 23:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Disruptive, possibly automated edits to talk pages originating from this project.
Hi -- since late 2021, there has been an absolutely rampant problem with unconstructive edits made to talk pages, and several of them seem to originate with this program. Some relevant diffs can be seen in this list. This is a small sample I happen to have around -- I have been reverting them when possible, but unfortunately if they are not caught before the archive bot then they're stuck there forever thanks to this.
These edits often, but not always, follow a pattern and are thus easy to find. They are usually on pages related to school curriculum and usually they come from IPs. Their header is a subject area, e.g., "Math," and the text is something unconstructive, e.g., "English" or "Difine governance with Example." It's not quite the same issue as this, as the edits are far more nonsensical and fragmented, and lack even the marginal usefulness those had. Sometimes they seem to be exam questions or prompts, e.g., "Tick the correct answer".
I suspect that many of these originate with text-to-speech or LLMs given the date they started pouring in (GPT-3 released 2020). And I do mean pouring in, like from a couple dozen to thousands. (It's possible that this was still really common before 2021 and people just caught them already, but I doubt that because the pattern of undetected vandalism/test edits on talk pages is usually the opposite, i.e., the majority of unreverted vandalism/unconstructive edits to talk pages are from 2006-2010, with the exception of this stuff.)
Is there any way to stop this? Obviously we can't control people's behavior, but the pattern of these edits is so regular that it seems like something automated might be causing it. Gnomingstuff (talk) 18:55, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Gnomingstuff These don't look like the kinds of edits I see student editors making - if it was coming from them, I imagine there would be a mixture of logged-in and IP edits of this type. I just don't see student editors logging out specifically to make these kinds of edits. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- That makes sense, thanks! It's a much broader problem than just school-related articles. A lot of them do seem to be pretty clearly related to class assignments though and/or are on pages with the "this page was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation" notice, so I just wanted to flag it just in case. (edit) This diff is a good example of what I mean, "today's lesson."
- IP edits seem to be much more common than logged-in users although I do see them from logged-in accounts occasionally.
Gnomingstuff (talk) 19:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Category: