PowerPoint:
Here is the link to the PowerPoint
Homework:
Read “Wikipedia Pops Up in Bibliographies” by Larry Gordon and write a response to the questions on OpenLab.
- What did you think of this text? Explain! Don’t worry if you don’t like it, you won’t hurt my feelings! Be honest!Â
- What is it mostly about? Write a 2-3 sentence summary. Be specific. Refer to the text itself. Use quotes even!Â
- What is the genre of the text? What is the tone?
- Who do you think is the intended audience of the piece? Who is meant to read this text?
- What do you think is the purpose of this text? Why do you think the author wrote it?
- What about using Wikipedia? When is it a good idea to use Wikipedia? How might you not want to use Wikipedia?Â
- Will this article help you with your research?
License
© 2024 Eng. 1101 – English Composition 1 – D191 – Fall 2022 – Coleman
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
It kinda strange how the fact that college is allowing us to use Wikipedia as our assignment it really odd for me.
Is that if we should use Wikipedia as our research. Or having Wikipedia as our assignment for our research. That our collage allowing us to use this research.
the tone of this genre was being taken more seriously then is was before.
what i think that Wikipedia has every answer to your question that is not safe to use. It a easy way to gained good information.
The purpose of this story that if we should use Wikipedia as our assignment for our research that would help use more answer our questions.
it okay to use Wikipedia but we can’t use it often because it would become a habit of using it and won’t learn from nothing. It would help if you get stuck on something that should be useful.
it would help knowing I could use some of it for my research if I get stuck dig deeper to my research.
I though it was informative, especially the part where some college professors have students write up for Wikipedia as a curriculum. I never knew that, so it was very interesting,
It’s gives more context on Wikipedia and it’s popularization in the public and in college classrooms. However, it also mentions with all the stigma around it from high school and how it’s seen as unreliable with faulty errors,
The tone was serious, and the genre was an informational text
I think the intended audience was for everyone, users of information, and college students. It suppose to show a bit of the process of Wikipedia and it’s build up. Especially with other’s being able to edit and write on it anonymously.
I think the purpose was to show us how Wikipedia is an easy accessible site to use. However, the downside is that it’s not an accurate place to always go back to. The author wanted us to see more of people’s view on it as well.
I think Wikipedia is a good starting site for some research, millions of people use it. However, we shouldn’t rely heavily on it. Many of the text written may contain untrue facts, and errors.
Yes this article is helpful to my research because in a way its making me more wary on where to find sources and information. While wikipedia is a easy site, Im sure there are many others that have more accurate information.
1. I don’t really like this text,but it’s interesting about the Wikipedia part.
2. The text’s main argument is whether readers ought to use Wikipedia. Or if the research papers might not be accepted if Wikipedia is not a credible source.
3. An article is the text’s genre. The tone was also incredibly consequential and relaxing.
4. I believe that everyone who plans to utilize Wikipedia is the target audience.
5. I think the point was to show how Wikipedia permits different people to modify it, which undermines its credibility and makes it risky to presume that the information supplied is accurate.
6. Well, sometimes it’s good. Only when a source is reliable or when it becomes apparent that additional sources agree with those found on Wikipedia, may you use Wikipedia as a supplement.
7.My knowledge that there are many alternative options and sources to choose from that are reasonable and reliable has been helpful. Sometimes, the second or third choice is preferable.
1) I liked this text because I myself have always been told to not use Wikipedia as credible source. But after reading in to this article, I have been convinced otherwise! This article is useful to me.
2) After reading the article, I know that the article is about whether on whether wikipedia is a credible source. It covers the basics of wikipedia, as well as the rigorous standards for uploading content onto wiki.
3) The genre is an educational article and the tone is serious/informational.
4/5)I think the a=intended audience is those looking for a site that offers informational resources and the author is trying to encourage their pupils to use wikipedia as a credible source as research. It can also be for those who disapprove the usage of wiki as research, because it refutes the claim and supports the claim that it is a credible source.
6) I believe wikipedia should be use if the information given is non-fictional and is accurate. Do not use wikipedia if you are sure what you are reading Is fictional and not accurate.
7)This article does not help me with my research as of now, however it does mean I will consider using wiki for information.
I found the text interesting with how many students changed their mindset for how they were writing, especially when they knew their writing would be published in a place where people all over the world would have access to. Not only would it be seen by various people but there would be a lot of criticism in their writing which is why the students felt pressured to do their best in their research. The text was interesting because it gave me a perspective of the people who publish in the media and what goes through their mind as they get ready to post.
The text is about debunking the myth about wikipedia, that it’s an unreliable source, when in reality it can be useful. Based on the many people that have created work to publish in wikipedia and how much effort they put into their paper so there would be no bias.
The genre of the text is an article. The tone is serious and persuasive.
The intended audience is for students and teachers as well because most teachers usually tell their students to avoid using wikipedia. This article can show teachers and students that its not as bad as it seems.
I think the purpose of the text is to show a different side of wikipedia, to show how useful it can be but to also be aware of the website because it’s not guaranteed that all the information in the website is reliable.
It’s a good idea when you want to know about topics and look for guidance. It is good to check the sources being used in order to fact check for yourself. It is not good to base all your paper on just Wikipedia; there needs to be different sources.
This article will help me because I won’t avoid wikipedia and I can find sources that may be useful for my paper.
I liked this text because it gave me a different perception of Wikipedia. I was always told by teachers to ignore Wikipedia and not use it for research because it is unreliable so reading this text and seeing the benefits of Wikipedia was interesting. I also found it interesting that teachers assigned students to write Wikipedia entries and not just regular papers, that sounds nerve-wracking for the students but they had a positive attitude about it.
This text is mostly about the benefits of Wikipedia and how professors are teaching students to embrace the site even with its popular untrustworthy reputation. The text explained how different people being able to edit and add to entries in Wikipedia is a good thing to help make it more accurate and spread information because Wikipedia has “ a powerful reach and is often the first site suggested by google searches”.
I think the genre of this text is a research article and the tone is unbiased because the author speaks about the negative reputation that Wikipedia has but also quotes students and professors that use Wikipedia for assignments.
I think the intended audience of the text is other teachers and students who refuse to acknowledge Wikipedia because they think it’s unreliable and amateur.
The purpose of this text was to convince people that Wikipedia is not terrible and does have use. Just because Wikipedia allows people to edit their articles doesn’t mean that it is fiction or biased. They have a lot of safeguards to prevent the spread of false Information.
I think it would be good to use Wikipedia if you want to become a better writer. I think this because the text says “Compared to regular term papers, Wiki entries require a lot more faculty time to ensure they are ready for online viewing” meaning that when writing a Wikipedia entry the standards are higher than writing a regular paper. After all, it has to be factual and unbiased. I think the Wikipedia entry assignments given by professors helped prepare students to write for the real world. I wouldn’t use Wikipedia in a research paper to find facts because I don’t think it is credible enough to cite.
I think this article will help with my research.