Category Archives: Research Based Argument

Seven Day Log

DAY 1:

I was very nervous to start this journey because like most of us, I have never created a page for Wikipedia nor did I ever want to before. However when learning about “women in Red” it made me realize how important it was to actually take part in the process and make a change. Women are often overlooked in society and have been for many years but as a young adult and a women myself it feels as though I’m helping out in a way to spread the word about these women who have greatly contributed to our history. So the first thing I did was create a Wikipedia profile of course. I thought this process was going to take some time to do but it was fairly fast and simple. This made me realized how easy anyone can just make a page and edit information on there…. my teachers were right.

DAY 2:

So this day consisted of me actually learning how to use the website since it the first time I’d be creating an article. I play the “Wikipedia Adventure” game. At first I thought it was a lot of information being thrown at me but I really did learn a few things from it. They have like a completely different system for how they do things… its not like Facebook or twitter. I don’t know why I thought it would be like that. There was a lot of small minor steps that you had to follow just so that you could even reply to a comment which to me is kinda stressful and confusing but it feels like a challenge so I kinda like it.

DAY 3:

Okay so now that I have the hang on things…sorta, it was time to pick a women in red! I wanted someone who had most of the boxes filled out (I picked the WD) so that it would be easier for me to do research on. After process of elimination I final found her. Meet our girl!!

Mira Sharpless Townsend

DAY 3:

So for this day I wanted to get an idea of how to edit and that’s exactly what I did. I went on a few pages and fix minor mistakes for example grammar and punctuation. Thanks to the “Wikipedia Adventure” game this process was easy but there is still a lot I need to learn about editing. I went ahead and looked up videos for reference since I’m more of a visual learner and got straight to work.

DAY 4:

On this day I went ahead and compared different pages in Wikipedia to see for myself the gender bias and the feminist theory. I looked up two names Melania Trump and Jeff Bezos. I was assuming that because they are both very well known tat they would have a lot of information on their page but to my surprise this wasn’t the case. Melania’s pages revolved around her husband even when mentioning her success while Jeff had basically an essay’s worth just on his childhood and early life.

DAY 5:

I started researching about the woman I chose to get an idea of who she was and what did she contribute and from this I gained a couple interesting facts. She’s from Philadelphia. She advocated for social reform movements. She had six children but unfortunately only two made it to adult hood.

DAY 6:

I started writing down on a notebook somethings that I would like to be mentioned in the page. I read that articles on how not to be biased when writing an article and I think that might be a challenge. I know that being biased goes against the guidelines and I have to be very careful with that. Another challenge that I have ran into was adding pictures. I tried to do it when fixing and editing other article but still haven’t gotten the hang of it so I will watch more videos on how to do so.

DAY 7:

I have gathered all the information for Mari (women in red) and feel as though I am ready to start my article. There is still something I need to look up but they are minor details. I am researching how to get started on writing and article and reviewing the 5 pillars so that I acn actually get started!

Posted in Research Based Argument, Wikipedia Process Journal | 1 Comment

7 day log

DAY 1:

I was trying to create a account in the library near where I lived. I used the library’s computer but didn’t work out. Many IP address were blocked. At the end I used my phone and connected to the library wifi and it finally works. Then I went checking if my Wikipedia account actually works.

DAY 2:

After my account is finally created I was looking at what Wikipedia wanted to show me. It was showing me what I can do, where to find what and editing. Later I started the Wikipedia adventure it shows me how Wikipedia works and I was just following the instruction.

DAY 3:

I started looking at articles and see if I know how to edited. I also learned to create a page to write my own stuff. After that I went back to Black board and open the red list link again looking for which one should I write about. However, I was in between a few women who were on the red list. So at the end I still didn’t pick one.

DAY 4:

Instead of choosing someone to write about for my project. I went looking at 2 different document. I was comparing the two documents since I got a little curious when I hard that most of the time women had less information then men. One is about Xiaozhan who is a male actress and the other one is Liuyifei. What I found was that although Liuyifei are a more experience actress and that she started acting earlier than Xiaozhan. In Wikipedia for Xiaozhan’s page there are much more information about him but for Liuyifei there are much less information. It might be that he had acted more films and had more accomplishment as singer as well. However, his information is pretty well updated everything is updated to 2022.

DAY 5:

I went back to the red list and opened those that shows some information. I realized many have information but there aren’t any picture. Also those that have information only have a little information. I also found many women who were on the red list familiar. Later I figure out that they were on the Chinese shows and Chinese drama that I had watched before. I was kind of surprise that they don’t have any information about them in Wikipedia since they are also celebrities’.

DAY 6:

I start looking through which women on the red list should I chose and which do I already know some information about. At the end I decided to pick one that doesn’t have any information or only a little or doesn’t have a picture and that I watched some shows or drama’s that she was in. I picked 4 women who were on that list and I went checking which one do I know more about and which one should I write about. So I went looking at their film work and songs etc.

DAY 7:

I had choose to write about Wu yang who is one the red list. Also that for her page it doesn’t have a image of her or much information. There’s only one four sentence talking about her name and her past experience. All of those experience are before 2018. However, I had watched one Chinese drama that was released in 2020 and she was one of the actress in the drama.

Posted in Research Based Argument, Wikipedia Process Journal | 3 Comments

Seven-Day Progress log


  • Introduced the Project instruction in class, I began scanning the list of women in red. I have introduced the concept of inequality and gender bias exist in Wikipedia.


  • After a quick scan through the list of Women in red, I was struggling to pick a woman in red to do research on. At first, I was planning to pick a Chinese feminist because then I can use the Chinese language search engine as a wider source to research. But then I realized that the greatest difficulty to research is to finger out the correct Chinese name for these activists while there could be many polyphones that had the same spelling.
  • I end up choosing Eliza Wright Osborne as my woman in red to research, she is an American suffragist and feminist.


Day 4

  • The greatest challenge occur, I couldn’t find a place with an IP that wasn’t banned by Wikipedia to create an account. The Baruch College I.P. and public library I.P. was both bans by from creating a Wikipedia account. I end up creating an account using the wifi of my friend’s restaurant.
  • Username: Ayin Angelous

Day 5

  • I look through the Wikipedia page of abortion and noticed that there was a line that considered abortion as the safest procedure in medicine if it’s properly done. This line could be misleading and neglected the effect of abortion on women’s bodies and mental health. And so I requested to remove the line from Wikipedia.
  • After that, I look at the discussion board on Wikipedia Abortion and noticed that the abortion page was way more ambiguous on the definition of abortion before. Miscarriage was once defined as abortion, but it should really be treated differently than abortion and natural miscarriage. Scamming through the comment part can actually point out many parts that included misleading and biased information.

Day 6

  • I went through the Wikipedia adventure, and it reminded me of the HTML and CSS class I took in high school, which is the main way to edit and add Wikipedia pages. It already took so long for me to go through this sample practice of publishing and editing this short Wikipedia of earth, I can’t believe how much information the devotees have to search and review every day in order to form a well-developed Wikipedia. Not to mention that there might be some hidden bias that required other devotees to discover and fix.

Day 7

  • I continued to research the background of Eliza Wright Osborne,
  • This gives information about where she lived and her origin, but its reliability is undetermined
  • This link gives specific details on Eliza Wright Osborne’s lifetime story but maybe the citation source of this biographical sketch may also provide more critical and reliable information:
    • The process of editing Eliza Wright Osborne’s Wikipedia page is struggling me a lot, I plan to start the content part on a word doc first then move it to Wikipedia with the citation.
Posted in Research Based Argument, Wikipedia Process Journal | 1 Comment

Seven Day Log: Wikipedia

Day 1: The Set Up

I started creating my wikipedia account, settling for the username “Marrychapelle”. I then completed Wikipedia Adventure, which was definitely a ride, I will have to review it again later on. To finish off the day, I watched Tutorials for Editing Wikipedia Pages.

Day 2: The Red List

Looking at the Red List, I spent the day looking for a potential candidate that I would be focusing on. After 2-3 hours of just clicking or seeing whether I would be able to gain more information on any of them, I took a short break. I was interested in learning about the family members of Jose de San Martin but with the limited information, I resigned my goal. In the end, I chose Guadalupe Vázquez Luna who is a Mexican activist, artisana, and councilman representing the Tzotzil people in the national Indigenous Congress (CNI).

Day 3: Trials

I took the chance to look around wikipedia to try new settings now displayed that based on having an account. I looked into the Talk feature and View History Page. Surprisingly for wikipedia, a lot of things had no discussion forms at all. I felt tempted to just start a discussion and say “Hi” but thought back on it and just thought that there wasn’t a point. I was glad to see that Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Women in Red was active. People were discussing resources they have gathered or plans to further research women. At the time I finished writing this, two new comments emerged.

Day 4: The Edit & Comparison

You never realize how hard it is to search something until you actually have to do it rather than stumbling across a new word and searching it up. I really had no idea what to look for in order to take the step to edit a page, so I took to tiktok and let the magic happen. Lucky for me, an edit of the Walking Dead came up and I took the initiative to search up my favorite actor: Andrew Lincoln. Pressing the “Edit Source” button, I definitely felt an intense amount of pressure and anxiety come up. I felt like the Wikipedia policy would suddenly ban my account and say “Don’t edit!”. But after maneuvering around the flash of code (Tip: Use the “Preview” to visualize the edits as you go), I did my first edit! It was just a switch of words but I never felt so proud. I wanted to update the image but it was too complex for my first time, I’ll come back to it! Also, I didn’t know that after editing, your edit would go under “pending review”, I thought it was editing and that’s it. Now I’m worried that it won’t be liked.

My edit

Speaking of Andrew Lincoln, I decided to take the chance to compare his page with that of Danai Gurira who starred as “Michonne” in the Walking Dead series. Already, I could tell there was a difference distributed to the two actors. Although Andrew Lincoln was admittedly the main protagosnigt of the hit-show, Danai Gurira played a huge part in the development of the plot, gaining much love by fans. That being so, a paragraph of Lincoln’s work in the Walking Dead makes sense, but Gurira’s one phrase of her role in the show does not do her any justice. Not to mention that the rest of her recognition are vague and short. Looking at their tittles, we can also see the differences in how they are introduced. Lincoln has his section named “Early Life” while Gurira had “Early Life and Education”. Lincoln had his education included in his description as well. When it comes to references, Gurira had 80 while Lincoln had 50. Despite the first hiccup, the article for Gurira did tend to be looked at a bit more with descriptions of her career outside of acting and her role in activism compared to Lincoln’s short piece titled “Politics”. I then conclude that the comparison between Andrew Lincoln and Danai Gurira, may not explicitly be impacted by gender bias.

  • As of 3.28.23, the edit is still under review.

Day 5:  Research

I took this day to learn more about Guadalupe Vázquez Lun. Using her name in the google search, I was surprised to find quite a bit of basic information about her. Due to her name being in Red, I honestly thought she would be a bit hard to look for, but this only reaffirms the gender inequality in wikipedia where despite information being available, these women activists don’t have their own page. After researching around my “Red Woman ”, I started creating my first wikipedia page (I think it is a page or sandbox might be different). This just consisted of working around the code and playing around with the edits.

Day 6: Documentary

Learning that Guadalupe Vázquez Lun was included in documentary telling of her heritage, I took the time to watch it. It was very interesting and something that I have decided to focus on in her page. If anyone wants to watch it:

Lupita. Que retiemble la tierra

In 2019, Mónica Wise and Eduardo Gutiérrez Wise made the short Documentary Lupita. Que retiemble la tierra, [3] in which Guadalupe Vázquez Luna herself, tells her story and that of Las Abejas de Acteal. The documentary was awarded at the Virtual Film Festival 2020 in the United States, and has been presented in different forums. It was selected for the Tour Ambulante 2020 cycle.

Day 7: Beginning The Process

I continued working on my page, using the video guides on Blackboard as reference. It has proved to be very difficult but bit by bit, I think I am starting to get the hang of it. Working on this, I have to give my gratitude to the Wikipedia writers because this is not easy, it honestly discourages you to write things because it seems too easy to write due to my experience with other websites. Which again brings me to question, why is Wikipedia so complex in making a site? But I’m glad we’re doing this, even though it might not come from professional hands, I believe our sincerity will do good in getting these women’s names out there. 

Posted in Research Based Argument, Wikipedia Process Journal | 4 Comments

Seven Day Process Journal

Day 1: I haven’t created an account on Wikipedia yet, but I found my red name, Jenna Baronette. She is a Canadian and an emergence nurse at the North Bay Regional Health Centre. She is a female activist fighting for sexual trafficking. 

Day 2: I did more search on Jenna Baronette. She was an emergency nurse trained to work for sexual assault and domestic violence victims. She was awarded the Outstanding Service in Women’s Wellness Award in 2015. She brought up sexual trafficking as a huge issue within the Ontario community. She brought attention to this issue and wanted people to help to solve this issue in the community because the majority of the victims were women. 

Day 3: I created a Wikipedia account, my username is Aawaan. I did the Wikipedia Adventure, it helped me to get to know how to use Wikipedia such as editing, leaving a comment, inserting links, pictures etc. 

Day 4: I was looking through some Talk pages on Wikipedia. There was a comment made by a person who said that the page was crap. But underneath that comment, other people said that the page was great. I can see what people thought about a page and can find that some people are biased and some people are more neutral. There are also people adding onto the information to help people to understand better. I also checked out the View History Page, it showed every edit that people had done to this page. It’s kind of interesting to see how many times and what they had edited into the page. 

Day 5: I edited a page which I think needs improvement. It’s an interesting experience to edit on my own. Sometimes it’s kind of confusing but I still got it in the end. 

Day 6: I started to work on writing a page for my red name women. It is hard because there is not much information about her. All I could find was one article that talked about her. But I did manage to find her LinkedIn page, it talked about her education. I guess that is some new information about the red name women.

Day 7: Overall, as a reflection, Wikipedia is kind of hard to use because the system was kind of different from what I had used before. And doing research using Wikipedia was also kind of hard because of the uncertainties. It is hard to tell whether or not it is a biased or neutral point of view and whether or not this information is reliable. Also, finding resources for the red name is hard because there is so little information about them. Some of them did not even have pictures. But the exercise of getting less red names is really meaningful because it shows that people are trying to change the prejudice of society.

Posted in Research Based Argument, Wikipedia Process Journal | 3 Comments

Jason Hernandez. Wikipedia Process Journal

Day 1: 

  • I created my account with the username of “This Name Shouldnt Be Taken.” It felt impossible to make a simple username but so many of my ideas were taken.

Day 2:

  • I chose an activist named Adelaida Argüelles who is a Spanish Activist. I thought it would be interesting to read about someone that comes from my own culture. 

I saw that there are online articles about her in spanish. I can read in Spanish, so I think this will help me improve my reading as I work on Adelaida Argüelles for my project.

Day 3:

  • I am looking at different wikipedia pages.
  • First I looked at the one for an anime series named “Naruto.” The page talks about the manga, tv series, video games, spins offs, and the story development. I went over the history page and noticed how there are people constantly making edits throughout the months. There have been some recently this month. There isn’t much on the discussion page, except for a few fans who are taking this article very seriously. Where they set it up for discussions due to technical terms they want to write on the page.
  • I then looked at the video game called Minecraft that has a big community who added different sections such as the game itself, the mods that can be added, cultural impacts, awards, sales, education, and even music. Fans are constantly making edits for it as well. I checked on the discussion tab and saw that there have been copyright complaints and it was even discussed whether or not it should be deleted.

Day 4: 

  • Completed Wikipedia Adventure. Got to learn how to edit, make corrections, view history, and reply to others.

Day 5:

  • Comparing two opposite gendered people on wikipedia.
  • I first looked at Dwayne Johnson and noticed he has a lot of different sections that talk about his careers in life. Such as his college career, wwe career, acting, awards, and his early life. The article has a lot of references towards the bottom. The talk page has people wanting to make edits or add a few more topics. And people are constantly making edits. 
  • Then I looked at an article for Jenna Ortega and noticed how it is less compared to Dwayne Johnson. Here, the article focuses on her acting career only. While Dwayne’s had his college life and early life. 
  • There is alot going on in the talk page where people were discussing simply if the voice sample should be added in the article. 
  • People are still making constant edits for Jenna’s article almost everyday.

Day 6:  

  • Added edit for an web series called “Don’t Hug Me I’m Scared.” I added in the section of Premise, “People theorized that Yellow’s guy name is “David”, especially now with the TV series hinting at it more and more.” 
  • In less than 5 minutes, someone immediately took it off because I didn’t have an reliable source.
Posted in Wikipedia Process Journal | 2 Comments

Argument Essay

Here is where you will post your Argument Essay.

Please do not post here until you have received feedback.

Posted in Argument Essay, Research Based Argument | Comments Off on Argument Essay

Wikipedia Article

Here is where you will post your Wikipedia article.

Posted in Research Based Argument, Wikipedia Article | Comments Off on Wikipedia Article

Wikipedia Process Journal

Here is where you will post your Wikipedia Process Journal.

Posted in Research Based Argument, Wikipedia Process Journal | Comments Off on Wikipedia Process Journal