User:147.26.87.8/sandbox

After evaluating Organizational Theory I concluded the following: •Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Yes, each fact referenced is cited correctly and with a reliable source. •Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? While yes, all information was relevant, it also come across that not all points and ideas were contributed, which may make the article biased. •Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Weber's idea of bureaucracy is heavily touched on, which sways a reader that may not know of any other ideas to compare information to. •Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? Information comes from a variety of reliable sources such as: Harvard Review, Cambridge University Press, etc. •If biased, is that bias noted? •Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? As previously stated, yes there is some underrepresentation. •Check a few citations. Do the links work? Yes, the links/citations work. •Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? No, everything is properly cited/ paraphrased correctly. •Is any information out of date? No, with my research it seems all information is up to date. •Is anything missing that could be added? As stated above, different ideas could be touched on more than they are.