User:76.78.73.221/sandbox

Evaluating Content

In the Break-fast article, the article explains the overall topic and then goes into depth by briefly explains the differences between cultures. This effective because the reader will understand that if they see a variation of what was written in the article, they will probably think it is one of the more specific versions of break-fast. When they talk about Ramadan, they should add that they can eat after sundown. The way they made it seem was like they hand no food at all for 30 days straight which would be impossible. The article could go into more depth about the occurance sine it is only a several sentences long.

Evaluating Tone

The tone is completely natural in this article. There is no use of "I" statements so the authors opinions or biases are not shown in the article. The facts are clearly stated with no extra content to persuade the reader to think a certain way. There is a lot of information, however, the occurrence section is not balanced with representation. What is represented needs longer descriptions and they should mention which culture of Jews use which type of days

Evaluating Sources

All though all the links work, most of them are from 10 or so years ago. They should pick more up to date articles. Although many things in religion don't change very quickly, it is always important to use up to date article just in case. All of the sources seem neutral except for one. The Rare Ramadan delights article talks a lot in first person and their own experiences with the food they're making which could persuade someone to think something if they haven't tried it themselves. All the sources match up.

Checking the Talk Page

Most of the talk was about how it possible to expand this more to other related religions since many of them do break-fast. One person said the article should be deleted because most of the information is in the Yam-Kippur article and "break-fast" is not a real thing. The article has been rated "Low importance" for that reason.