DAY 1
- 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.
DAY 2
- 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 3
- I did more research on Eliza Wright Osborne and found a website that was supported by the National Endowment for the Humanities that provided some basic information about Eliza Wright Osborne. https://www.womenandthevotenys.com/1suffragists-vetted/Eliza-Wright-Osborn
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 https://freethought-trail.org/trail-map/location:eliza-wright-osborne-residence/
- 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: https://documents.alexanderstreet.com/d/1010113822
- 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.
I found it so interesting that you mentioned trying to choose a Chinese Woman in Red. After reading some of the other logs, it seems like many of us tried to choose someone we could relate to.