Hello, Larodge, and welcome to Wikipedia!
- To get started, click on the green welcome.
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.
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) 23:26, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Good job but word of advice
Heya Larodge... Good job on getting the ball rolling with your group by posting on their user pages. Just one word of advice: you might want to think twice about putting your phone number online. This is a public site. I mean, I'm sure that it's OK in this instance, but here (as always everywhere on the Internet), you should take a little bit of caution about putting personal information out there.
But anyhow, the main thing I wanted was to say good job on kick-starting things. As you pointed out, the first part of this assignment is due Wednesday. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Heya, just to point out that if you look here you'll see that User:Awadewit has volunteered to give special help to your article, Magic realism. Of course, you guys are to take the lead, and above all do the research required to improve the article. But you should definitely feel free to contact Awadewit on her talk page. You'll find she's very friendly and knowledgeable about writing for Wikipedia, and will give you as much help as she can.
Note from Ebenfc
Hey, I was in Whistler yesterday, so sorry about not responding. Today I've done some work searching for articles and books that seem interesting and worth while. So far I have found 3 books and 4 articles that seem thorough and/or interesting enough to look into further. I suggest that everyone search for what they'd like to read regarding MR and compile their contribution on a single page in order for the group to know where we're at.
- (This was mistakenly posted to your user page, so I've moved it here to your talk page. Mike Christie (talk) 00:08, 19 January 2010 (UTC))
Note from Laura
Note from Kayo
Hi Liz! Just wondering if you had any luck finding books/articles? I've found some, but I want to make sure we're not overlapping. Do you think you can post the sources you've found on the group's talk page? That'd be wonderful!--Kayohk (talk) 18:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
So all of this considered, we need to figure out a way to unproblematically include surrealism in the article while making the difference between the two movements clear, as well as the nature of the two movements in term of media. - Leyanese 19:06, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)