Wikipedia:GLAM/SOAS/Lingwiki

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Main Page Lingwiki
Lingwiki project page
Hello. This page has been set up to facilitate the Lingwiki editathons and events at SOAS. The project is supervised by Lauren Gawne and Charlotte Hemmings.


We have a number of task we are working on to improve Wikipedia's Endangered Language and Linguistics page. We meet up once a month at SOAS for editathons, but we welcome any contributions to these topics at any time and from anywhere! Wikipedia has pages for all languages that have an ISO 639-3 language code, so it is unlikely you will have to make a new page. Remember to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's editing practices, and articles that do not follow Wikipedia practices and guidelines will be put up for deletion.

Resources[edit]

There are lots of great resources on editing Wikipedia. For linguists you can check out some of the resources made by Gretchen McCulloch:

  • Slides for how to edit Wikipedia as a linguist (CC-BY) bit.ly/lingwiki, French version at bit.ly/lingwikifr, Spanish version at bit.ly/lingwikies -- Feel free to use for your own editathon! If you translate into another language, do let me know so I can link to them.
  • A cute guide to linguistics stub sorting on Wikipedia, created with User:Keilana for linguistics enthusiasts who aren't sure if they have enough knowledge to edit: bit.ly/wugsorting.
  • The #lingwiki hashtag on twitter - where editathons move online. You can tweet your contributions, suggestions, or questions there any time!
  • The original grant proposal to Wikimedia Inspire for the SOAS editathons below.

Archive linking[edit]

For the Lingwiki project we are aiming to link all ELAR and Paradisec archives to the relevant language pages on Wikipedia. This improves Wikipedia's links to important materials about endangered languages (sometimes they are the only materials about a language). It also gives participants the chance to engage with endangered language archives and visit lots of different endangered language pages.

To participate:

  1. Choose whether you want to link from Paradisec or Endangered Languages Archive (ELAR).
  2. Find a point in the archive to start working, and make note of it below.
  3. Work through the languages in alphabetical order (Paradisec) or collection number order (ELAR).
  4. Take the URL for a collection.
  5. Go to the relevant Wikipedia page.
  6. Go to the External Links section of the language page, if there's not one, create it
  7. Write a short sentence that captures the nature of the collection and add it as a link. Mention which archive it's from and link to its Wikipedia page. Include mention of whether it's open access, and note if it's open access, or covers specific genres, has video, or is just text documents.
  8. Make a note of the change as something like 'added link to Paradisec/ELAR.

For an example of how this is done see the Ahom page "external links" section, where a link to the Paradisec archive has been made. don't forget to make a note below if you're participating. If there is any information on the archive page that can improve the language page more generally you can also include that information with reference to the archive.

PARADISEC[edit]

We will be working through the "Languages" column of the [[1]] page in alphabetical order.

Current Work[edit]

The paradisec collection is here (http://catalog.paradisec.org.au/)

Lauren's Sandbox includes a list from Paradisec of all the languages in the archive not yet linked to the relevant language page on Wikipedia. Some languages will not show up in Paradisec's catalogue as they are 'hidden' collections and shouldn't be added.

ELAR[edit]

ELAR will be linked by collection number. You can work through the ELAR collections using their URLS. e.g. http://elar.soas.ac.uk/deposit/0001 Pick a range of 20 or so numbers at a time!

Current Work[edit]

Emily will be working on linking ELAR collections starting from deposit 300 (http://elar.soas.ac.uk/deposit/0300)
3 December edit-a-thon: Got through deposit 303 (four entries)
28 April edit-a-thon: skipped deposits 306 (Ratsua), 311 (Kula) as no Wikipedia entries exists, got through to 318 (Duoxu)

Sarah will be working on linking ELAR collections starting from deposit 1 SMD3719035 (talk) 16:29, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[User:ADHarvey|ADHarvey]] has been working through the 300s

Jemima has worked from 0400 to 0409, 23 Nov '16

Grammars[edit]

If you've got some linguistic training gram a descriptive grammar, find the language page on Wikipedia and start improving the quality of that page. If you're not completely comfortable with all of the grammar work with the sections you are interested in. If you have no linguistics training you can still add the basic information about the speakers, their location and other ethnographic information that is often given at the start of a grammar.

Need help finding a grammar?

Linguistics pages[edit]

If you're interested in a specific feature of language, across different language pages (e.g. Phonetics inventories) you can enrich specific linguistics pages.

Article Assessment Scale[edit]

This is the scale by which Wikipedia articles are rated. In order to see a ranking go to the article's talkpage. The different grading levels will also elaborate on how an article can be be improved. Many language pages on Wikipedia are stubs, and any contribution is very welcome!

WikiProject article quality grading scheme
Class Criteria Reader's experience Editing suggestions Example
 FA The article has attained featured article status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured article candidates.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured article criteria:

A featured article exemplifies Wikipedia's very best work and is distinguished by professional standards of writing, presentation, and sourcing. In addition to meeting the policies regarding content for all Wikipedia articles, it has the following attributes.

  1. It is:
    1. well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard;
    2. comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context;
    3. well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature; claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate;
    4. neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias;
    5. stable: it is not subject to ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured article process; and
    6. compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy and free of plagiarism or too-close paraphrasing.
  2. It follows the style guidelines, including the provision of:
    1. a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections;
    2. appropriate structure: a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings; and
    3. consistent citations: where required by criterion 1c, consistently formatted inline citations using footnotes—see citing sources for suggestions on formatting references. Citation templates are not required.
  3. Media. It has images and other media, where appropriate, with succinct captions and acceptable copyright status. Images follow the image use policy. Non-free images or media must satisfy the criteria for inclusion of non-free content and be labeled accordingly.
  4. Length. It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate.
 Professional, outstanding, and thorough; a definitive source for encyclopedic information. No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available; further improvements to the prose quality are often possible. Cleopatra
(as of June 2018)
 FL The article has attained featured list status by passing an in-depth examination by impartial reviewers from WP:Featured list candidates.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the featured list criteria:
  1. Prose. It features professional standards of writing.
  2. Lead. It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.
  3. Comprehensiveness.
  4. Structure. It is easy to navigate and includes, where helpful, section headings and table sort facilities.
  5. Style. It complies with the Manual of Style and its supplementary pages.
  6. Stability. It is not the subject of ongoing edit wars and its content does not change significantly from day to day, except in response to the featured list process.
 Professional standard; it comprehensively covers the defined scope, usually providing a complete set of items, and has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about those items. No further content additions should be necessary unless new information becomes available. List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events
(as of May 2018)
 A The article is well organized and essentially complete, having been examined by impartial reviewers from a WikiProject or elsewhere. Good article status is not a requirement for A-Class.
More detailed criteria
The article meets the A-Class criteria:
Provides a well-written, clear and complete description of the topic, as described in Wikipedia:Article development. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, appropriately structured, and be well referenced by a broad array of reliable sources. It should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. Only minor style issues and other details need to be addressed before submission as a featured article candidate. See the A-Class assessment departments of some of the larger WikiProjects (e.g. WikiProject Military history).
 Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject would typically find nothing wanting. Expert knowledge may be needed to tweak the article, and style problems may need solving. WP:Peer review may help. Battle of Nam River
(as of June 2014)
 GA The article meets all of the good article criteria, and has been examined by one or more impartial reviewers from WP:Good article nominations.
More detailed criteria
A good article is:
  1. Well-written:
    1. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    2. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    1. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    2. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
    3. it contains no original research; and
    4. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    1. it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    2. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    1. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    2. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 Useful to nearly all readers, with no obvious problems; approaching (though not necessarily equalling) the quality of a professional publication. Some editing by subject and style experts is helpful; comparison with an existing featured article on a similar topic may highlight areas where content is weak or missing. Discovery of the neutron
(as of April 2019)
B The article meets all of the B-Class criteria. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards.
More detailed criteria
  1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations. It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
  3. The article has a defined structure. Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
  4. The article is reasonably well-written. The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but does not need to be of the standard of featured articles. The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. The article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.
 Readers are not left wanting, although the content may not be complete enough to satisfy a serious student or researcher. A few aspects of content and style need to be addressed. Expert knowledge may be needed. The inclusion of supporting materials should be considered if practical, and the article checked for general compliance with the Manual of Style and related style guidelines. Psychology
(as of January 2024)
C The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup.
More detailed criteria
The article cites more than one reliable source and is better developed in style, structure, and quality than Start-Class, but it fails one or more of the criteria for B-Class. It may have some gaps or missing elements, or need editing for clarity, balance, or flow.
 Useful to a casual reader, but would not provide a complete picture for even a moderately detailed study. Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems. Wing
(as of June 2018)
Start An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources.
More detailed criteria
The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas. The article has one or more of the following:
  • A useful picture or graphic
  • Multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
  • A subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
  • Multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
 Provides some meaningful content, but most readers will need more. Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use. Ball
(as of September 2014)
Stub A very basic description of the topic. Meets none of the Start-Class criteria. Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. Readers probably see insufficiently developed features of the topic and may not see how the features of the topic are significant. Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority. The best solution for a Stub-class Article to step up to a Start-class Article is to add in referenced reasons of why the topic is significant. Lineage (anthropology)
(as of December 2014)
List Meets the criteria of a stand-alone list or set index article, which is an article that contains primarily a list, usually consisting of links to articles in a particular subject area. There is no set format for a list, but its organization should be logical and useful to the reader. Lists should be lists of live links to Wikipedia articles, appropriately named and organized. List of literary movements
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:GLAM/SOAS/Lingwiki&oldid=997683069"