Wiki Washy Siteations

Wiki Language to Learn : Articles to be Expanded & Stub Categories

Articles to be expanded

• ·      organized by date
• ·      goes back 5 years starting January 2007

Stub Categories

• ·      organized by importance
• ·      stubs=categories involving time period and genre
• ·      category- organized alphanumerically
• o            ex. music- album

Using Public Discourse Terms I set out to get a feeling of how developed Wikipedia's content is

11.    Universal language-needs additional citations for verification

2.    Exigence- redirected: Exigent circumstance in United States law

3.    Audience- needs additional citations

4.    Constraints- not included in public sphere genre

5.    Stasis- covered in rhetorical sphere, redirected to: Inventio

6.    Question of value- does not exist

7.    Public discourse- redirected to public sphere

8.    Materiality- redirected to Materiality (digital text)

9.    Identity construction- does not exist

10.Subgenre- redirected to genre

11.  Fact of definition- does not exist, suggests facts

12.Translation- fully developed page

Part Two

 Now to put a Wikipedia Article to the test! 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Freakley

... that retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Benjamin Freakley (pictured) served under General David Petreaus during Operation Iraqi Freedom, and later commanded the 10th Mountain Division in Afghanistan?

•   What kinds of sources does the article you are assessing use?

·      Publications

o   The North Virginia Daily

o   Army Times

o   American Forces Press Service

o   West Point Grad News 2010

o   New York Times

·      Books

o   In the Company of Soldiers: A Chronicle of Combat

•   Are any other sources unreliable or not well-respected? Why do you think so? Are there any you are unsure of? Why?

·      Not sure if The North Virginia Daily is well respected because I am not sure where they get their facts. Also, the Lieutenant is from Virginia so their reports could be biased.

·      Jefferson Community College- although it is an institution’s publication

·      Arizona State University- could be unreliable because Lieutenant Freakley is alumni and they want to portray their alumni as successful and structured (especially since Arizona State University won the #1 party school in America, followed by yours truly FSU)

•   Check five individual facts in the article against the sources. Are the facts reported correctly in Wikipedia? If not, what is incorrectly reported?

1.          Fact: Freakley invaded Iraq a second time during Operation Iraqi Freedom.= yes. New York Times reported this and the two other sources used the fact in a parallel manner.

2.          Fact: during Operation Desert Shield, Freakley worked on the war plans. Fact reported by the North Virginia Daily. The issue lies in that the three criteria for definitions of source are not covered. We have a link to the piece and the authors name but no proof that the publisher, Mike Gochenour, is a reliable source.

3.          Fact: After retiring from the Army, Freakley became a professor at Arizona State University and special advisor to the university's president. The fact is reported correctly as Arizona State University’s Presidential Office webpage states that Freakley as the first advisor to the president of the university.

4.          Fact: In 2007. Freakley took command of Accessions Command, where he remained until he retired in 2012. The fact is supported by three sources: The North Virginia Daily, Army News, and Army Public Affairs. The first two sources could be incredible sources due to their lack of citation to a credible publisher or source. Army Public Affairs is published directly by the Army hence, is a credible source.

5.          Fact: After Iraq, Freakley became the Chief of Infantry at Fort Benning. Fact correctly presented according to the United States Army website.

·      Do you think the information in this article is generally reliable based on your analysis of the sources? Why or why not?

·             I believe this information is generally reliable as the majority of the information comes directly from the United States Army. Also, the various institutional periodicals that are included in the Wikipedia article lead the reader to a firm and reliable understanding of the article. Some statements can be classified as statements of opinion as the articles were published in Freakley’s hometown but Wikipedia includes the Army in the citation of the statements. Wikipedia’s page on identifying reliable sources states that “the more widespread and consistent this use, the stronger the evidence.

·      Based on the level of detail

·      The article has a lot of details of the Lieutenants history. His career was meticulously documented by the government agency that he worked for. The Army would not publicly lie about participation in battle or award. Wikipedia asserts that tertiary sources should not be used in place of secondary sources for detailed discussion. The Freakley Wikipedia page uses both tertiary and primary sources hence should be deemed as credible.

       Feeling a bit overwhelmed/confused/startled/offended/hungry? Read on!     

Analysis

Editing a Wikipedia page is probably more difficult than you think it is. According to Wikipedia policy unprotected articles can be edited by anyone with Internet access. Wikipedia keeps this open editing monolith in check by keeping strict sourcing guidelines that aim to keep the information reliable via the validation of the author’s- who can be anonymous- citations. To be considered a reliable source for a Wikipedia article it must embody three characteristics: a cited article, a clear creator/author, and the publisher of the work. Using these three criteria Wikipedia distinguishes reliable articles from those containing fallacies and possibly even lies. The Benjamin Freakley article demonstrates how tertiary (secondary) sources aid in establishing credibility. I thought it would be interesting to analyze this American Lieutenants biographical article because of the diverse citations compromised of government and non-government sources. “While specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred” (Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia). As a participant in higher education I cannot think of a more reliable source than a public government article but now understand how fallacies can be a product of lazy argumentation (Jones 172).

            Jones’ piece: Finding the Good Argument states: “most people do not realize they are committing fallacies when they create an argument” (Jones 172). It suggests a 10 rules for creating solid arguments. The Benjamin Freakley Wikipedia article is a sound example of the correct use of rules 4, 5, 8, and 10. Rule 4 focuses on how the evidence used in rhetoric must relate to the standpoint. This article keeps a neutral standpoint throughout the biographical account of Benjamin Freakley. When his badges and medals were mentioned the article does not insinuate any connection to ethos, which could cloud the purpose of the article- to inform. Rule 5 focuses on the false representation of information. The claim that Freakley is a special advisor to the University of Arizona’s president is parallel to his title on the University of Arizona’s webpage.

            The effective use of multiple sources is supported by Bazerman’s Techniques of Intertextual Representations. The Wiki article lies on Bazerman’s third level of intertextuality: “mentioning of a person, document, or statements” (Bazerman 88). The article uses the readers’ familiarity with the Army as a foundation to establish credibility while using other media outlets to show the reciprocity of the information- simultaneously building credibility. Citing both the tertiary and primary source supports the idea that the second author can expand- as they did- his or her ideas with out having to worry about the credibility of the facts that make up their arguments (not present in the Wikipedia article).

            Works Cited

Bazerman, Charles. Intertextuality: How Texts Rely on Other Texts'. University of California, Santa      Barbara, Print.

Jones, Rebecca. Finding the Good Argument. Diss. Parlor Press, 2010. Print.

"Identifying Reliable Sources." Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia.Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.22 July        2004. Web. 27 Feb.2013.<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_rel   iable_sources >

Graduation Frustrations a la Policy Conflict

            As my graduation approaches I am having to deal with a workload the size of Mt. Vesuvius. While in the past I’ve only had to worry about schoolwork, I am now faced with the task of entering the workforce. My free time has been consumed with cover letters, resumes, and personal narratives in an attempt to woe employers. Recently, it came to my attention that there were no hotel rooms available for the weekend of graduation in May. About a month ago I my mother called me to ask if I graduated on May 3 or 4. I told her I was not sure and that I had to get back to her. Fast-forward a month to now. She calls me in a state of panic and rage and tells me it’s my fault that she can’t find a hotel room because I did not tell her which day I was graduating.

            My cup is already running over attempting to graduate, can’t my family take care of making their own hotel reservations? Besides, the 1-day difference should not have been the deciding factor; they knew they needed to be here those days. Kaufer’s third level supports my cause of policy conflict. I disagree that it is my fault that she does not have a hotel room as she already knew the exact weekend of my graduation. When I discovered and told her in late January that there were no vacancies is when she decided to point fingers and blame me. 

     According to Jones a simulation of an argument is when it different views are openly discussed. When discussing serious issues Jones finds perspective to be important. Mark Moran’s “Top 10 reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely on Wikipedia” is blatantly biased hence cannot be characterized as a simulation. This argument falls more into the ethical deliberation category as it uses details to offer a strategy for developing sound, ethically aware arguments (Jones 161).

            Kaufer reminds us that authorities taking a side on an argument will meticulously use relevant information to develop their discourse. In this case the author uses differences in scales (values) to lure the reader in. For example, the 7^th reason to not cite Wikipedia is: Individuals with agendas sometimes have significant editing authority. This statement is relying on the assumption that the authoritative entity is misusing his or her power. This list was created to convince students to not cite Wikipedia; attaching value to the argument via the difference of scales is effective and increases the likelihood of the text making an impact on someone.

            In my situation with my mother, she made sure to stay away from the value statements because she knows I am in the right. She relied on weight of policy to place the fault on me through selective facts.

     “The Top 10 Reasons Students Cannot Cite or Rely On Wikipedia” uses the word credibility as an ideograph. The audience is clearly outlined in the title of the article and will catch their attention, as students are constantly hearing about issues of property rights and legitimacy. The word most definitely carries ideological assumptions as a resource without credibility means little to nothing in academia.

            The discourse goes on to give examples of people who, without bad intentions, took advantage of the system to prove that illegitimate information could be posted on Wikipedia. Shane Fitzgerald made an illegitimate comment about deceased French composer Maurice Jarre. After major newspapers were using his quote he emailed them questioning their sources. Genius!

            My mother, a lovely lady indeed, used the word graduation to wrap me up in an argument based on values. I could argue the fact that she did not make the reservations soon enough but in the end I’m either part of the solution or part of the problem. I ended up taking over the hotel issue and found a local Marriot and used my personal Skymiles to pay for most of the room. I better be getting a jaw dropping graduation gift after all of this, just saying. 

The Fabulous Life of Logic, Facts, Editing with Coffee, and Wikilies

Meta Discourse

            The organizational pattern the author chose is effective and helps organize the arguments. According to Kaufer this argument is working on the third conflict source level in that it makes statements and holds evidence directly supporting its claims. For example, number 8 claims that contributors with an agenda often prevail, then sites a controversial issue from 2009. The claim starts at the fact stases and ends up at the value stases as the reader begins to understand the gravity of the situation.

            In regards to the stases, I found that the statements more meaningful by organizing the arguments with the most important and effective stasis up front. This was easily fixed by changing the order the arguments were presented in. For example, argument #9 is that “you especially can’t rely on something when you don’t even know who wrote it.” A fact statement was supporting this argument; a cause stases is better fit as it presents the support in a logical manner. Since the context is lack of legitimacy it is ok to use logic rather than truth because there is no definite truth to share with the reader (Jones).  

            The juggling of truth and logic can be used to foster solid arguments. It’s imperative to know when to use them as they can avoid assumptions, which tend to weaken formal arguments. Before I changed the wording in #4 it based its discourse on values and assumptions. Now it focuses on accurate editors as opposed to active ones – active does not mean accurate.

            As an editor I found analyzing sentence structure to come naturally. I could easily assess when the emphasis was placed in the wrong part of a sentence. Staying focused on the purpose of the article helped me tweak the statements to better support the claims. I used tips outlined in elements of style that recommend placing the most important parts of the sentence at then end. I had the most trouble with finding adjectives to replace broad claims. When taking a stance on an issue it is important to use specific diction that leads readers to a concrete conclusion as opposed to one of assumptions.