hey! I'm writing a proposal for my HSSRP social sciences research project.

Here are the rubrics:

No	Key elements of research proposal	Questions to ask yourself	Intellectual Standards
1	Research Area and Title
Identify your research area.

Give a working title that captures its essence.  (This title may be tentative and may be revised in the course of your research.)	
    • What is your research interest?

    • What is your proposed title for research paper?
	
Be clear and specific in stating your area of research and crafting your research title.
NB: Key words that describe your project should be in the title.
2	Research Question, Thesis or Hypothesis & Value of Study
State your key research question.


State your hypothesis / preliminary thesis (You may change this in the course of your study, in the light of more information/data.)

State the purpose of the research and the value of your research to the field.



	

    • What is your research question?


    • What is your hypothesis / proposition / key argument in relation to the research question?

    • Why are you doing this study?
    • What is/are the gap(s) in the field you are trying to bridge?
    • What is new and interesting about your research study?
    • How can you contribute to the field with this research project?	

The research question should be clear and focused, summarising what you want to investigate.
Your hypothesis / thesis statement should be clear and specific to guide your investigation.
The topic should be significant enough to warrant research.

The depth and breadth of proposed research should be achievable within the duration of the mentorship.
3	Literature Review
Offer a concise review of the relevant literature and theories you have read so far in relation to the research area.	    • What are the key discussions and debates on the research area?
    • Why is there debate or disagreement on the issue?
    • How does your research relate or respond to what has been done by others in the field?	Be selective in your review and include only relevant and significant information related to the area of study.
4	Research Method
Outline the key research method or approach you plan to use to achieve your research aims.



	    • How will you go about conducting your research to achieve your research aims?
    • How is your research method/approach appropriate for your study?
    • Where and from whom will you get your data?
	The research method should be relevant to the area of study and fulfils the purpose of the study.
Be clear in justifying your choice of research method / approach, showing how it fulfils your research aims.
5	References
State the key reference texts and resources you have read so far that you believe will contribute to your research.
	    • What are the key publications you have read or known that are related to your research interest?	Show critical reflection in your selection of texts in the reference, citing only those which are significant and relevant to your area of study.
Resources should be scholarly/academic sources, NOT newspaper articles or Wikipedia sites.


And here is my proposal draft:
Research Title: Breaking News on Wikipedia: A Qualitative Analysis of Global Event Selection and Regional Representation in Wikipedia’s “In the news” Section

Research Area: Cultural representation and biases during the editing of Wikipedia’s “In the news” Section

Research Question: How do Wikipedia’s editorial community decisions and discussions affect the selection and presentation of current events in the “In the news” section? What does this reveal about regional and cultural biases in global news representation?

Hypothesis: The selection and presentation of events in Wikipedia’s “In the news” section reflects certain biases, favouring Western events and perspectives, despite Wikipedia’s goal of maintaining a neutral point of view.


Purpose of research

Wikipedia is a vast, rambling "universe" of information and knowledge. It is also a key element of our information infrastructure today. By examining the criteria it uses to select newsworthy events and the discussions surrounding these choices, I aim to uncover underlying patterns that reveal how certain events are prioritized over others, thus reflecting broader societal values and biases in the online information system. This helps us to understand Wikipedia as a social and cultural phenomenon.

Much research has been conducted on the neutrality of Wikipedia. However, I note that none of them focus specifically on the “In the news” section, found on the Wikipedia home page. This section is particularly unique because it is updated daily and describes current events, and as such provides key insights into Wikipedia’s role as a news curator. In my research, I wish to use this section to examine real-time decision-making processes rather than just static content. Furthermore, by focusing on the “In the news” section’s editorial discussions, this research will provide practical insights for Wikipedia’s governance policies. The findings could inform strategies for more balanced representation of global events and help develop better guidelines for news curation.


Literature Review

Existing literature about Wikipedia mainly focuses on three areas: credibility, representation gaps, and governance structures.

Research [1] reveals significant issues with verifiability in Wikipedia articles, showing heavy reliance on U.S. government websites and news media, with limited academic sources. This “lack of bibliographic imagination” [3] perpetuates knowledge gaps and raises questions about Wikipedia’s suitability for serious reference work. However, some authors argue that rather than dismissing Wikipedia, attention should focus on improving information literacy and source evaluation [1,4].

Next, representation gaps is also discussed in the papers I have read. Studies of geographical coverage [2] show that WikiProjects often fail due to lack of sustained leadership and broader socio-economic constraints. This connects to deeper questions about “who gets to represent whom” [2,3]. The challenge of representation is complicated by what describes as “blind spots” produced by the editorial community’s composition. [3]

The third point is about the effectiveness of Wikipedia’s governance structures. It appears to have an increasingly decentralized governance model [7] with refined policies and norms. However, this creates tension between central policies and community autonomy. Studies of editor roles [6] suggest that “informal socialization” effectively maintains necessary labor distribution. However, the long-term sustainability of such a structure is unclear.

These articles also provide information about Wikipedia’s role in news reporting. Wikipedia increasingly serves as a news resource [8,9], with varying time lags in covering different types of events. This raises questions about the platform’s ability to maintain quality while keeping pace with news cycles.

My research is directly related to these areas, as it looks at how editorial decisions reflect representation biases. This research contributes by investigating the decision-making processes that shape Wikipedia’s current events coverage. This addresses a gap in understanding how Wikipedia’s editorial practices influence global event representation and how existing biases are shown in immediate content decisions.


Research Method
My proposed research methods are mainly qualitative content analysis.

1. Data collection of the ITN section
Collect daily snapshots of the ITN section over a period of 2-3 months. Additionally, save discussion pages relating to ITN selections.

Collect:
- What events were considered & selected
- Geographic location of event
- Topic category (politics, disaster, sports, etc.)
- Length of time featured in the ITN section
- Number of editors involved in discussion
- Vote count (support/oppose)
- Reasons for inclusion/rejection, according to discussion pages

2. Analysis
Compare:
- How many events from each region made it to ITN
- Which types of events are most common
- What reasons are most often cited for inclusion/exclusion
- How long different types of events stay featured

3. Interviews with editors
Send interview questions to a number of editors who frequently contribute to ITN section.
e.g.
“Describe your process to decide whether to support or oppose an ITN nomination”
“What sources do you typically reference when evaluating an ITN nomination?”
“To what extent do you agree that the ITN selections are unbiased?”

References
1. Improving Wikipedia's credibility : references and citations in a sample of history articles | DR-NTU
2. Wikipedia's gaps in coverage : are Wikiprojects a solution? a study of the Cambodian Wikiproject | DR-NTU
3. Representation and the problem of bibliographic imagination on Wikipedia
4. Improving Wikipedia's accuracy: Is edit age a solution?
5. How and why do college students use Wikipedia? - Lim – 2009
6. Finding social roles in Wikipedia | Proceedings of the 2011 iConference
7. Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance
8. Wikipedia as Participatory Journalism: Reliable Sources? Metrics for evaluating collaborative media as a news resource
9. How much is Wikipedia Lagging Behind News? | Proceedings of the ACM Web Science Conference



Rn the proposal text (excluding references) is 850 words. Based on the rubrics, can you add maximum 150 words? Use diff editing style.