User:Aliarenee/sandbox

92.67 + = full credit | = half credit - = zero credit

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

My real name is: Alia Greenhalgh

My Research Topic is: What is the difference between the Catholic and Christian religion?

Key words related to my Research Topic are: Religion, Catholic and Chrstian

Part 1:

I- (There is no article with that specific title) chose to read and evaluate the article titled: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&profile=default&search=what+is+the+difference+between+catholic+and+christian&fulltext=Search

Use the criteria from the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure to evaluate the article. (Get your copy from the Reference Desk.)

+ - 1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? No

+ 2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? yes

+ 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?” Yes

+ 4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? It gives me background about Catholics which is helpful because I am a Christain and do not practice catholcisim so it's good to know for my research.

+ 5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? '''Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? It gives facts about a religion.'''

+ 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

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

+ a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English? yes

+ b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? Not really

+ c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? No

+ d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? Im not sure

+ e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? Somewhat but it might be necessary.

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

+ 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? No

Part 2:

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

+ Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History) This article was last updated 2, Feb. 2016

+ Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) Some of the authors of this article are a part of other different wiki projects and have edited different articles and so they can be reliable to no write anything that may not be true.

+ Relevance (to your research topic) This article is giving me information I can use about a religion that I am not too familiar with and is part of my research topic.

+ Depth This article give plenty of information such as different churchs, practices of catholicism, the history, ect.

| Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) research article

+ Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) To give information about one individual religion