6816 Week 2 Wikipedia Activity

Step Three: What stance on Global Warming does the article appear to take (ie. caused by humans, or a naturally occurring event; will have catastrophic implications)?

The article blames humans as the cause of global warming.  “Scientists are more than 90% certain that most of it is caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by human activities such as deforestation and the burning of fossil fuels.”

Step Four: Continue reading the Wikipedia article and chose a claim to verify (i.e since 1979, land temperatures have increased about twice as fast as ocean temperatures). 

Temperatures in the lower troposphere have increased between 0.13 and 0.22 °C (0.22 and 0.4 °F) per decade since 1979, according to satellite temperature measurements.

Step Five: Using Google find two websites. One that supports the claim and one that disputes it. Use this Website Evaluation checklist to validate the sources. Post the information from the check list in a blog posting along with links to the sites.

http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/f101.asp?gclid=CPXW54zNrrACFWQDQAodwyxKUA

This website believes the increased air pollution from humans in the cause for global warming.  This website also states that the average global temperature has been increasing at a rapid rate since 1950. 

http://www.lunarplanner.com/SolarCycles-climate.html

This website states that humans are not the only cause for global warming.  Other planets in our solar system have experienced global warming and there are no humans there?  This site states that the sun may play a factor in global warming. 

Step Six: Click on the "Talk link" at the top of the Wikipedia Page. What does it mean that this article and its editors are subject to General Sanctions? 

The general public can add information that they think will improve the article.  People should use caution analyzing the information.  

Step Seven: Scroll down to the frequently asked questions section. Chose one of the questions and read the answer. Verify the answer using another online source. Link me to the source. Is the information presented in the answer to the question reasonably accurate? 

Question:  Is the sea level rising because of global warming?

Answer:  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090315155112.htm

This was the second source listed under Wikipedia when I Google searched the question.  This news website said that Global warming is expected to cause the sea level along the northeastern U.S. coast to rise almost twice as fast as global sea levels during this century.  I would deem this website as a good source.  The information came from Florida State University and there is contact information for the editor who put this story together. 

Step Eight: Below the FAQ section read the section titled "Back to old lede". This is where Wikipedia editors explain their edits to the page and justify their decisions. Does reading this section increase your understanding of Wikipedia as a reliable source of information? Why? or Why not?

This section allows readers to see the work and justification of others.  I believe this section is essential in determining whether or not a particular article is credible. 

Step Nine: Kim D. Petersen (talk) is one of the editors for the Wikipedia article on Global Warming. Click on her name to see her profile. Then read her "talk" page. Again how does this information make you feel about the credibility and validity of information on Wikipedia?

In some cases, knowing more about the author and their history can help someone decide if Wikipedia is a credible source.  I would have liked more information about Kim Petersen.  At this point, I am on the fence about whether or not Wikipedia is a good source.  Maybe the author is exaggerating or lying about their past?

Step Ten: How do think Wikipedia could be integrated into classroom activities. What do you think about using Wikipedia as a source of information instead of textbooks? Post an image that represents your views on Global Warming.

I think Wikipedia should be used in the classrooms, but not as a primary source that is used often.  Wikipedia articles could be compared to scholarly articles to examine the differences and if bias exists.  Teachers could give students the same activity you gave us, to better help them analyze texts.