Final grades for the spring semester are submitted. W00t! It has been a busy one—particularly the second session, where I picked up two sections of NMAC 5108. We get no extra consideration for graduate-level courses: no additional pay or course releases despite the fact that they always seem to be twice the work. Having two sections simultaneously is not something that I particularly wish to do again. Even though I’ve not taught this course in a few years, I think it went pretty well. Yes, there was some confusion and disorientation, as there always is, but most managed to push beyond the dissonance and produce some great work.
Individual Wikipedia Projects
So, I want to recognize some of the strongest individual Wikipedia projects completed by students in NMAC 5108: Writing and Publishing in Digital Environments. These articles go beyond meeting expectations—they exemplify the goals of open-access scholarship, thoughtful research, and writing for a real, public audience. Several students created or substantially improved articles that make Wikipedia richer, more inclusive, and more informative. Each article listed below reflects initiative, attention to sourcing, and editorial care:
- Cynthia Shearer by Wik1mar456 – A well-structured and thoroughly sourced biography that adds depth to Wikipedia’s coverage of contemporary Southern literature.
- Edith Elizabeth House by Cvinson12 – A clear and focused biographical entry built from the ground up, expanding the visibility of a notable critic and educator.
- Life Among the Savages by Josiehadaway – A well-developed expansion that brings new depth to an important but often overlooked work of mid-century women’s literature, balancing literary context and reception with care.
- University of Oxford tortoises by Hobbitonya – An original and balanced contribution that captures an eccentric Oxford tradition while staying rooted in encyclopedic tone.
- Frances Virginia Tea Room by KaraCroissant – A fascinating and well-sourced article on a historic women-led institution in Atlanta, demonstrating careful research and cultural insight.
- Lulu Hurst and Adeline Morrison Swain by MerAtticus – Two exceptional biographies that highlight overlooked women in history, written with clarity and rigor.
- Edna P. Lowe Swift by Winnverxx – A strong biographical article that meets Wikipedia’s standards for notability and sourcing while contributing to the record of African American educational leadership.
- Thelma Thompson Slayden by LogansPop – A thoughtful, well-organized entry that brings new attention to a historically significant figure through careful sourcing and clean editorial work.
While I’m sure there are some I missed, each of these students embraced the challenge of writing for a public platform and demonstrated real scholarly initiative. Their work now stands not only as a class assignment but as a contribution to the world’s largest open-access reference work. To all those who worked hard on this project: thank you. Your writing matters—and it now lives on as part of the public record.
Collaborative Projects
In addition, students also worked collaboratively on improving already-existing articles that needed attention: The Prisoner of Sex and the Stabbing of Adele Morales. Both articles had suffered from longstanding issues: thin documentation, narrative imbalance, and missing scholarly context. Thanks to the efforts of students in the course, both entries are now more accurate, responsible, and useful to general readers and researchers alike.
The Stabbing of Adele Morales
Before student intervention, the article on the stabbing incident read like a tabloid entry: a few news snippets, barely contextualized, and with little to no reference to the long-term consequences for Mailer’s reputation or Morales’ life. The revised article now provides a more comprehensive account rooted in biographical and journalistic sources, including the major biographies. The article now situates the stabbing within the broader cultural conversation about gender, violence, and literary celebrity.
Students expanded the legal and psychological aftermath of the stabbing, including Mailer’s involuntary hospitalization and the media’s response. They also added much-needed biographical detail about Adele Morales, whose voice had been largely marginalized in previous versions of the article. Drawing on Morales’s own memoir, The Last Party, students were able to re-center her perspective in an article that, until recently, treated her largely as a footnote in Mailer’s life.
The result is a more nuanced and ethically grounded entry. The current article still needs more diverse perspectives—particularly from feminist scholars and critics who have written about the incident in the context of Mailer’s legacy—but the groundwork for such additions is now firmly in place.
Student editors deserve real praise here for elevating this entry from a skeletal chronology to a more rounded piece of public knowledge.
The Prisoner of Sex
The Wikipedia article on The Prisoner of Sex was another case of an underdeveloped entry, composed mostly of narrative summary and a handful of vague references to its “controversial” reception. Students brought scholarly rigor and balance to the article by:
- Merging and refining the original “Reviews and critiques” and “Positive reviews” sections into a single, coherent “Critical response” section, modeled on Wikipedia best practices.
- Citing major critics like Robert Merrill, Diana Trilling, Joyce Carol Oates, and V. S. Pritchett to show the diversity of contemporary responses.
- Adding scholarly analysis of Mailer’s central argument—that Kate Millett’s Sexual Politics distorted the literary record—and grounding that claim with support from critics and biographers.
- Rewriting the “Town Bloody Hall” section to focus exclusively on its relevance to POS, and eliminating redundant or misattributed claims already covered in the main article.
The article is now more aligned with Wikipedia’s standards for neutrality and sourcing, and it provides a clearer sense of why POS remains both a product of its time and a flashpoint in the cultural debates over gender and literary expression.
Still, work remains to be done. The article could benefit from more citations to contemporary feminist responses, and the “Synopsis” section remains somewhat underdeveloped. But students transformed what was previously a stubby entry into a well-structured and critically informed resource.
A Note of Gratitude
I want to offer sincere thanks to all of the students who participated in this project. You engaged directly with primary sources, biographies, and literary criticism—and you channeled that work into improving the public’s access to knowledge. You did so collaboratively, critically, and ethically.
Of course, not every student’s project was perfect—and that’s okay. Some ran into issues with sourcing, notability, or staying within Wikipedia’s editorial guidelines—a couple students even had challenges getting their work past more experienced Wikipedia editors. Others didn’t engage the group work as fully as they could have, or struggled to find the right tone. But these missteps are part of the learning process. Writing for a real-world audience—especially one as visible and rule-bound as Wikipedia—requires patience, humility, and practice—lots of practice. Even when things didn’t go as planned, students had the opportunity to grapple with questions that matter: What makes a source reliable? How do we write collaboratively? What does it mean to publish something in public? Those are lessons worth carrying forward.
Wikipedia remains one of the most widely used reference platforms in the world. By improving its articles on subjects as fraught and as culturally significant as these, you’ve helped shape how future readers—students, journalists, casual browsers—understand the life and legacy of Norman Mailer and the women most affected by his actions and arguments.
Your work matters. Thank you.