User talk:Sk106512

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hello, Sk106512, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help.We're so glad you're here! Matthewvetter (talk) 22:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seth

Just a daily message from your secret admirer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Da484012 (talk • contribs) 19:14, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tuesdays In-class Assignment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalyn_Sussman_Yalow

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? -Yes, it appears that every fact is backed up with the appropriate reference. I can tell because the links that this page gives you, take me to reliable pages that are used to cite each fact.

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? - Yes, everything in the article is relevant. It goes through Rosealyn's biography, work and awards. All of the sentences match up with each other and go in a sequential order so it makes sense. The brief facts about her at the beginning are a good intro to her article.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? -I believe this is a neutral article. It does not seem that any editor is trying to be biased for or against her. They seem to be straight facts about her and represent her in a fair manner.

Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that biased noted? -The information that is provided for this wikipage is from a variety of different sources. This including books, newspaper articles, and some other websites. Based on the information in the articles, there could be some biased information because the articles is strictly about her and what she did. This making it so the authors that wrote about Roseablyn may have an inside relationship that would influence the writing in a way that makes her seem more appealing.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? -I feel like her work section on the wiki page may be a little underrepresented because that is how she become famous. This section could include more detail or facts that explain more of what she participated in.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? -Yes the links that I check did lead to actual websites that provided information for this wiki page. From what I read, I did not catch any paraphrasing or plagiarism from the articles that were cited.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? -Some of the sources are fairly outdated so I would assume that some of the information is a little outdated on the wiki page. Without doing more research and lack of knowledge on this particular women there would have to be some more detailed research. Since this a wiki page I would say that there is always something missing that could be added. These pages are constantly being edited and new sources can be found.