User:Deazot/sandbox

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Fall 2015

My real name is:Ethan-Patrick Conte Dizon

My Research Topic is: Meditation and stress relief

Key words related to my Research Topic are: Meditation, peace, stress, calm, spirituality

Next examine Wikipedia articles that are directly related to your Research Topic and select a substantive article to evaluate. This could be an article about an idea (e.g., I might choose the one about Trance) or a person (if I were researching Reggae music, I might pick Bob Marley). Answer the following questions:

I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: Meditation (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)

Use the criteria from the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure to evaluate the article. (Get your copy from the Reference Desk.)

1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? No

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

Write a brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter?

Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warnings that are in that banner. Prayer Beads has a warning banner that shows the article requires further citation and that unsourced material may be removed.

2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? Yes

3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and foonotes at the end?” Yes

4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? Yes

5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? Yes, neutral language was used, no bias.

6. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc. Yes.

7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English? Yes, all grammar and spelling is clear and precise.

b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? No

c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? No, they are specific with who the WHO is.

d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? Yes

e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? No

f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? No, there are many footnotes.

g. Look at the Talk Page for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors? No, it is all calm.