User:Flyingcats67/sandbox
{{student sandbox} https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Flyingcats67/sandbox
My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Fall 2015
My real name is:
Cassidy Roberts
My Research Topic is:
The History of Meditation
Key words related to my Research Topic are:
History and Meditation
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: (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? Yes or No
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.
I was unable to find an article about my topic that had a warning banner.
2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?
I wouldn't say it summarizes the key points, but it does give a lot of useful information and detail about the many origins of meditation.
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, there are multiple headings for the different topics and a few pictures.
4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?
Yes. I think it thoroughly covers the history of meditation.
5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?
Yes it provides a neutral point of view.
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, it appears to cite reliable sources for more information.
7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:
It all looks like reliable information and it suggests a lot of other articles and sources that I could browse for more information.
a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English?
Yes.
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, it lists specific names.
d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?
No.
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.
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?
There's no disrespectful talk, mainly the author just asking for others to help add more reliable information because he or she is just learning about meditation.