User:AmiLinM/sandbox
 | This is a user sandbox of AmiLinM. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the sandbox where you should draft your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. To find the right sandbox for your assignment, visit your Dashboard course page and follow the Sandbox Draft link for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
FINALIZING MY WIKIPEDIA TOPIC (2/27/17)
I have chosen to make my Wikipedia project on Cricket Flour. I would like to discuss the nutritional and economic benefits of cricket flour, whether or not it is part of a fad diet and about the social stigma surrounding the food in the US and foreign countries such as Mexico.
Here are some potential sources, which I plan to use to support my writing:
Caparros Megido, Rudy, et al. "Optimisation of a Cheap and Residential Small‐Scale Production of Edible Crickets with Local By‐Products as an Alternative Protein‐Rich Human Food Source in Ratanakiri Province, Cambodia." Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, no. 2, 2016.
Gmuer, Angelina, et al. "Effects of the Degree of Processing of Insect Ingredients in Snacks on Expected Emotional Experiences and Willingness to Eat." Food Quality and Preference, vol. 54, 01 Dec. 2016, pp. 117-127.
Smiderle, Dave, et al. "Overcoming the "Ick" Factor: An Exploratory Study on Techniques to Overcome Consumer Barriers for a Nutrition Bar Which Contains Cricket Flour." Food Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, vol. 6, no. 2, June 2016, pp. 41-48.
Wallace, Hannah. "Are Crickets the New Quinoa?." Oregon Business Magazine, vol. 39, no. 2, Mar. 2016, pp. 10-11.
POTENTIAL ARTICLE TOPICS (2/24/17)[edit]
- School Lunch
- Farmers' Market
- Food Desert
- Hospitality Included (i.e. no tipping in restaurants - no existing article)
- Cricket Flour
CRITIQUE AN ARTICLE (2/20/2017)[edit]
Choose an article: Wheat Thins
Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Most of the facts are referenced with appropriate references, however some are unreliable or dead links.
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? I think everything was relevant, however the advertising section has some facts that were so specific, it almost seemed unimportant to a reader who may want to know about how or where Wheat Thins is advertised.
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article is neutral and did not seem biased in any way.
Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? One of the more notable sources used was the New York Times, another which seemed less academic was IMDb. I also liked seeing the link to the original Family Guy Wheat Thins commercial on YouTube.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, I think this article briefly gives a reader who may be interested in learning about what Wheat Thins is a good amount of information on the product and other similar goods from the same company.
Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? Yes, all of the links but the Yahoo! link works. However, I think one of the sentences that is cited doesn't pull any information from the actual source, which would be considered plagiarism.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? All of the information, to my knowledge, seems to be up-to-date. A lot more information could be added, such as when the product was developed and first sold in stores.