User:152.41.5.126/sandbox

= Article Selection = Verbena brasiliensis


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it is. There isn't much there, but what's present is relevant.
 * Is it written neutrally?
 * Yes
 * Does each claim have a citation?
 * It seems so, but every claim is from the same source (USDA), just two different pages from it.
 * Are the citations reliable?
 * Yes, the USDA is a good source.

= Evaluating content[edit] =


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * I was a little thrown off by the part about the plant being included in Meghan Markle's wedding veil. It seemed like a random fact, and the source did not look like the most reliable.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * I thought it looked complete.
 * What else could be improved?

= Evaluating tone[edit] =


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The conservation section seemed mildly biased in favor of greater conservation measures for the plant.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There was nothing against the plant by any means, but that's probably alright.

= Evaluating sources[edit] =


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The links work, and are relevant sources.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * The link about the royal wedding dress is the only one that throws me off. The rest appear reliable and relevant.

= Checking the talk page[edit] = Now take a look at how others are talking about this article on the talk page.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Every comment on the Talk page is at least 8 years old. There were discussions on adding more detail and making the page more collaborative, but it doesn't appear that ever really happened.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It's of interest to WikiPlants and WikiProject Africa
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?