BIO 4030
Wikipedia Project
WIKI ASSIGNMENT GUIDELINES
Wikis, collaboratively edited web pages named after the Hawaiian word for "quick", offer a solution to
the growing data glut in science. Wikipedia, the largest online encyclopedia, is the top hit for most
searches on scientific topics. Yet, scientists are reluctant to believe or contribute to Wikipedia. Although
discoveries in chronobiology have been named Breakthrough of the Year by Science magazine
repeatedly, this explosion of information has not made it into Wikipedia. This project has Bio 4030
students identify wiki sites in need of updating, edit their content, and distribute their information to the
world.
Our Timeline:
Mar 22: Wiki nominations due on Telesis
Mar 25: Vote for Top 15 Wiki sites.
Mar 26: Top 15 assigned to students (3-4 students/site).
April 1: Nominate our sites for "Good Article" status.
April 14: Edit of first Wiki site due
April 21: Edit of second Wiki site due
April 28: Re-edit of first Wiki site due
May: Draft of manuscript for Journal of Biological Rhythms. Bio4030 students will be authors!
Wikipedia Project: Why do this real-world experiment in editing?
1. Teach chronobiology to a world-wide audience
2. Update Wikipedia with current information on chronobiology
3. Enhance your ability to evaluate the accuracy of scientific writing
4. Enhance your ability to connect scientific ideas (e.g. by linking out from your wiki site)
5. Correct errors of omission and content
6. Experience large-scale collaboration
7. Practice scientific communication with the public
8. Master a topic in chronobiology
9. Have fun editing Wiki sites
1
BIO 4030
Wikipedia Project
Step 1. Nominate two wiki sites for editing (Due 3/18/11; 60 participation points).
Nominate two (one gene and one person) sites that need editing. Think of key genes and people in the
field of chronobiology. Look for them in Wikipedia. Evaluate the information for accuracy, gaps of
information or logic, sufficient scientific citations, and other features that you expect of high quality
scientific writing (See attributes of a good article below). For each gene or person, provide the Wiki
URL if it exists. In 200 words or less, provide your critique and recommendations for improvement of
the two sites. Answer the question: Why is this site a top candidate to receive the editing efforts of the
students in Bio4030?
Grading:
1. Number of sites you nominate (3 points each, maximum 6 points)
2. Your evaluation of the existing information on Wikipedia (out of 15 points).
3. Your recommendations for what needs to be done (out of 15 points).
4. Rank of your sites after the class votes (22 points for 1st, 20 points for 2nd, 18 points for 3rd etc.).
Step 2. Vote for 15 sites in need of editing (due 3/25/11 through the course website).
Step 3. Edit your first Wiki site. You will be assigned a Wiki site. You can request to work on specific
sites from the top 15 (due April 14).
Grading. Students will be graded after each edit of an assigned Wikipedia site (50 points each). You
must show that you understand: 1) how to use Pubmed, Web of Science Citation Index, and Google
Scholar and 2) how to effectively communicate current scientific knowledge to the public. You must
make substantial improvements to your Wiki, but in less than ~250 words in your first edit of the site.
Scientific accuracy
1. Rewarded for correction of incorrect facts
2. Rewarded for stating common errors or misconceptions
3. Rewarded for clarification of confusing phrases
4. Rewarded for adding (updating) knowledge
5. Rewarded for identifying what is not known
6. Rewarded for disambiguation of a definition
7. Penalized for omission of important facts or for leaving incorrect facts
Quality of organization and presentation
8. Rewarded for organizing the topics in a logical manner
9. Rewarded for correcting typos and grammatical errors
10. Rewarded for being clear and concise, and complying with the Wiki Manual of Style
Quality of citations
11. Rewarded for each new citation (up to 10)
12. Rewarded for following the Wiki guidelines for scientific citations.
Originality (remember, we only report what has been shown; we do not introduce our own ideas).
 Rewarded for creative presentation of information
 Rewarded for linking to related topics (e.g. publications, another Wiki page, etc.)
2
BIO 4030
Wikipedia Project
Step 4. Edit your second Wiki site. Again, you must make substantial improvements to another
Wiki, but in less than ~250 words. (due April 21). Grading same as Step 3.
Step 5. Edit your first Wiki site AGAIN. Finally, you will revisit your first Wiki site and make
improvements, in less than ~250 words. Grading same as Step 3.
Seek to comply with the following attributes of an informative wiki entry.
Attributes of a good article on a circadian gene:
 How big is the gene? How many introns and exons?
 Who discovered the gene and when?
 How is the gene related to chronobiology?
 On which chromosome (human or other species) is the gene located?
 Any orthologs? Any paralogs?
 Interesting evolutionary history (e.g. duplication; repeated sequences)?
 Are there known natural mutations in the gene? Are they associated with disease or not?
 What is the protein encoded by the gene? Any interesting motifs?
 Any notable post-translational modifications?
 Are their known interactors (e.g. other proteins) with your protein?
 What is the function of the protein in chronobiogy?
 Does it have known functions outside of chronobiology?
 What are the Pubmed number & link, Entrez # & link, Genecard link, Ensemble link & #?
 How is expression of the gene regulated?
 What current research is being done on the gene?
Attributes of a good article on a circadian researcher:
 Personal information (e.g. Date of birth and death, nationality)
 Academic and occupational summary/resume
 Scientific achievements with dates (summary of hypothesis, methods, results)
 Contributions to new theories, models, inventions, etc.
 Current status of their theories, models, inventions, etc.
 Factors that led to their scientific achievements
 Factors that impeded their scientific achievements
 Problems with their scientific achievements
 Applications of scientific achievements (to the every day life or other areas of science)
 Relationships to others (collaborators and/or competitors)
 Common misconceptions of person or of his/her scientific endeavor
 Awards and honors (please focus only on a few major recognitions)
 Scientific turning points or defining moments
 Failed projects or experiments
 Scientific opinions on concepts that may not have been explored yet
3