Daquigg
Welcome edit
Greetings...
Hello, Daquigg, and welcome to Wikipedia!
Bibliography assignment edit
Hi, here are the details of the MRR annotated bibliography assignment...
Good Wikipedia articles are built on a foundation of good sources. In this respect, Wikipedia articles are not much different from academic essays. In fact, if anything a good Wikipedia article is more reliant on good sources than are other academic or scholarly texts. The whole notion of verifiability, which is the first of the encyclopedia's five pillars, depends upon reliable sources.
The aim of this bibliography assignment, then, is to identify, read, and comment on the most important and reliable sources that relate to the topic of your chosen article.
In coordination with your group, you need to do the following:
- Identify the most important sources for your topic. These will be both books and articles. They will vary depending upon the kind of topic you have chosen, but to give a couple of examples this book is a key one for the general topic of magic realism, while this biography would be essential for the article on Gabriel García Márquez.
- Use databases and the Koerner library catalogue to identify these sources. Look for as many as possible in the first instance; you will later choose between them. On the whole, they will not be online sources (though of course many articles are now available online thanks to JSTOR and other services).
- Aim to come up with a long list of, say, 5-20 books and perhaps 15-40 articles. Obviously, for some topics there will be more material than for others. So for some topics you will need to do more searching; for other topics, you will need to be more careful and discerning as you choose between sources. Look far and wide and be inventive in thinking about good sources.
- In some cases, the article may already have a number of references, either in the article itself, or perhaps somewhere in its talkpage archives. You should take account of these, but you should still undertake your own search, not least to find new material that has not been considered before.
- To figure out what you need, you will also have to look at your article and consider what it is missing, what needs to be improved, where it could do with better sources, etc. In other words, you will have to start planning how you are going to work on and rewrite the article.
- Come up with a final short list of c. 2-4 books and perhaps 6-24 articles.
- Put the long list (of all the sources you have found) as well as the short list (of the sources you have decided are the most important) on your article's talk page by Wednesday, January 20.
- Distribute the sources among the members of your group. Each person should be reading the equivalent of one full book or six articles. Exceptionally long books may be divided up between group members.
- Read the sources, bearing in mind the information that is going to be useful as you work on the article. Think about what it covers and take a note of particular page numbers.
- Produce an annotated bibliography of the sources you have read. This will consist of a summary or précis of the most important aspects of the texts, which should be at least 150 words long for each article read; 600 words for each book. You should put this on your user page by Monday, February 8.
To coordinate with the other members of your group (whose names you can find here), use their talk pages. Each time that you log in to Wikipedia, you will notice that if you have a message waiting for you, there will be a yellow banner at the top of the page.
Good luck! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm looking forward to working with your class during the semester - if you have any questions about the project or Wikipedia in general, please feel free to leave me a note at User talk:Awadewit. Wikipedians are here to help you! Awadewit (talk) 23:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
long list edit
hey! thank you so much for looking up all those books! i'm sorry i'm getting to this so late, but i'm going to be on campus tonight and poking all around EBSCOhost and all those 'scholarly' journals for some more sources - most likely articles. i'll post what i find on the main page asap! :) --Phxalana (talk) 01:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hola David edit
Hey there,
Tessa here. I took a look at your and Alana's bibliography contributions and it looks like we have a lot to work with. We should start looking through them to see what we can use and what we can't. Because we are writing an article on his life/accomplishments/etc some books will be more useful than others such as books written about Asturias instead of comparative essays or interpretations of his work. I think it would be really useful for us to take a look at the article and see what it is lacking so we know what we're looking for and where we might find it. Also, we should think about inter-library loans because if we need a book from anothe library it would be best to order it now. Maybe we should all get together after class and create a plan of action. See you in class on friday,
--Trowan (talk) 23:06, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
David,
just wanted to let you know that we only have to do a annotated bibliography on either 1 book (600 words) or 6 articles (150 words each). Alanna is doing M.A.A by Richard Callan and i think i'm going to do Las novelas de Miguel Angel Asturias: desde la teoria de la recepcion by Lourdes Rayano Gutierrez. not sure what Raluca is doing. it might be easier for you to do articles from home cause you are super busy! good luck, --Trowan (talk) 18:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
working on surrealism as we speak. i am going to work on it till midnight tonight and then call it quits. i'm going to add to the politics and language section so if you have anything to add go right ahead! i don't think i will be working on it after tonight cause i gots to start a term paper. i think we have made some serious progress though. --Trowan (talk) 05:10, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Internal links edit
Hey David,
if you were wondering about internal linking, here is some info WP:OVERLINK. basically don't internally link a word, important pers, etc more than once. only the first use of the word or name should be internally linked.