Identify, Search, Collect, Annotate

This is a two part assignment. In this first part, collect and describe information sources to add to a Wikipedia article of your choosing (under certain constraints). The second part is due later in the semester.

Details

In this first part, you will identify a Wikipedia article to edit. The Wikipedia article must be a stub article. You will analyze the article for informational shortcomings, and collect sources that will address those shortcomings using the search skills and source knowledge you have acquired this semester. Later in the semester, in the second part (Wikipedia: Editing), you will edit the Wikipedia article and add any relevant text as well as references to the three sources.

For now, your job is to:

Create an account on Wikipedia (if you do not already have one).
Identify a Wikipedia stub article or a short article that you would like to analyze and edit later.
Analyze the stub or short article for informational shortcomings.
Collect and describe at least three high-quality, different sources (from separate web domains) that address the informational shortcomings as well as the search techniques you used.

Then, you will write a report that responds to the above activities. Your report should contain the following information:

Your Wikipedia user account name. For example, my Wikipedia username is Cseanburns.

Link to your user page that you have edited and that contains some basic information about yourself. For example, the link to my user page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cseanburns
(Links to an external site.)
.
The title of the Wikipedia stub article that you would like to address. For example, there’s a stub article titled “Mature Technology” that could be expanded (but you’re not allowed to pick my example).

Include a link to the Wikipedia stub or short article. For example, the link to the Mature Technology stub article is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mature_technology
(Links to an external site.)
.
An analysis of the informational shortcomings in the stub or short article. This analysis should include a 200 word response that addresses how the Wikipedia stub or short article fails to supply information to these basic, six questions, or some variation of these Who/What/When/Where/Why/How questions:

Who is involved?
What is this about? What has happened? Etc.
When did things take place? Time frame, etc.
Where did it take place?
Why did that happen?
How did it happen? (Source: Wikipedia: The Five Ws
(Links to an external site.)
).
Citations to three sources that respond to the basic, six questions. These should be high quality sources that you’ve found after searching UK Library databases, scholarly search engines, etc — that is, any of the tools we’ve covered in class, or comparable ones. The sources should be unique and not repeated (e.g., do not use different web pages from the same domain, like: example.com/webpage1.html, example.com/webpage2.html, …).
Proof that you have saved those sources to your bibliographic reference manager. To prove this, submit a screen shot of the saved sources in your preferred bibliographic manager app.
An annotated note for each of the sources. These should be notes that you have taken for each of your annotated sources. Each annotation should include a description of what the source is about (its content) that addresses some of the six basic questions (or variations of them) above. The annotated note should also include a short description of the search techniques you used and a note on the quality of the sources, per the criteria you have learned in this course.

For information about stub, see: Wikipedia:Stub Wikipedia: Stub Articles
(Links to an external site.)

Please use this template for your response. Feel free to save this template to your own Google Drive account and submit this report as a Google Document. Here’s the template:

Google Drive: Wikipedia Assignment Template