User:Ahmadm9/sandbox

3.8 My real name is: Mshari Ahmad
3.8 My Research Topic is: Love in Islam

3.8 Key words related to my Research Topic are: Islam, Love, Peace

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 I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.) the concept of true love in Islam. 'Mshari, I'm not sure which article you evaluated in Wikipedia. Was it this one: Religious views on love#Islam ?'

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 or No Yes it has. If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here. please do not site or distribute without permission of the author.

0 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?

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? Yes it was retty easy to understand and also summarize the key points in a way that makes the reader understand it easily

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 foonotes at the end?” The article is clear enough and it doesn't have plenty of headings and subheadings in the article and it doesn' have picture or diagrams. Yes appendices appear at the end of the article.

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 its balanced very well,

3.8 5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? no is not provide a neutral point of view, it does read like encyclopedia article not like essays 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. yes it is reliable, and they looks trustworthy informations.

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? It has some grammar mistake but I can get the idea, thats mean its clear and very well written. 3.8 b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? no it doesn't have.

3.8 c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? no is not refer to some or many or unnamed group.

3.8 d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? No, it seems extremely perfect.

3.8 e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? yes some of them not to much.

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? yes i found 2 out of 10 people that are not agree but the others were appreciated the work. __________________________

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 edit was on 11/2/2011.

5 Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) the author used an Islamic book as a resource, was written by one of professional writers and based on Quraan 5 Relevance (to your research topic) Yes the article is related to my research topic.

5 Depth is not enough to understan the whole meaning of Islam but it was excellent to get an idea about the love in Islam.

2 Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) Print materials ( published sources ) This article in Wikipedia is a website for the general public; you are correct that the sources are printed materials.

5 Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) the reason for this article to demonstrate how Islam is reliable and has message that Islam is about to love each other and help others and respect people 'Bold text