User:Adventurpack/sandbox

I like backpacking. Tuxedo cats are cool.

dogs

Thanks for your work in class today, Debbie! -Tom

102 % Mid Term Quiz [Part 1, each question is worth 3.8 % for full credit, for Part II, each question is work 5 % for full credit]
'''Evaluate a Wikipedia article relevant to your own Research Topic: To earn credit for this Mid Term, you must complete Part 1 and Part 2. This exam should take you less than 2 hours to complete. Be sure to give yourself enough time. It must be completed by noon on Wed. 4 May 2016.'''

1. Login to your own Wikipedia account, and click on Sandbox in the upper right part of the screen.

2. Then, in your Sandbox, click “Edit.” Click below the box that describes the Sandbox, then copy and paste the rest of this Mid-Term Quiz document into your sandbox.

3. Write your answers to these questions in your own Wikipedia Sandbox.

4. Click SAVE!

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Spring 2016

3.8 My real name is: Deborah K. Soto

3.8 My Research Topic is: Tai Chi Benefits

3.8 Key words related to my Research Topic are: Tai Chi

Part 1:

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:

3.8 + 2 I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: Tai Chi

Use the criteria from the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure to evaluate the article.

3.8 1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? yes but it isn't on the top

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

Write an 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?

3.8 It says that it doesn't have any sources cited which means that some of the information may not be true and we don't have any other reference to look for.

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 warning that is in that banner.

3.8 2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? The article is generally easy to understand. I can skim through it and be okay.

3.8 3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and footnotes at the end?”

The structure is very clear and organized. It shows a linage tree and other images to see how it was passed down and just to have visuals.

3.8 4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?

Yes it does. The different aspects of Tai Chi are clearly explained and the use of it is explained well and balanced with the other information given.

3.8 5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?

The article is more of an informational like an encyclopedia than a persuasive essay to do Tai Chi.

3.8 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.

The references lead to books and scholarly sources.

7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

3.8 a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English? Yes

3.8 b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? No

3.8 c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?

Yes

3.8 d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? No

3.8 e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? No

3.8 f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? No

3.8 g. Look at the “View History” 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?

I noticed that on one of the changes someone removed information that was possible vandalism but other than that it was mostly small edits like grammar issues.

__________________________

Part 2:

Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:

5 Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History)

Last update: April 18, 2016 4:42PM

5 Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?)

Looking through some of the profiles of the editors, there was one who has a graduate degree in Chinese and Master of Arts degree.

5 Relevance (to your research topic)

It is the main topic to my research topic and gives health benefits

5 Depth

This is good judging from the information given, the grammar, and the authors who contributed to the article. It seems like a source for general public, I would think that a scholarly source would be more sophisticated or harder to read.

5 Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.)

General Audience Website

5 Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?)

Explaining the basics of what Tai Chi is, where it came from, how it spread, and the different types of Tai Chi.