User:Alyssakubs/sandbox

95 % + =correct | = mostly correct - = incorrect

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-15 Fall 2017

My Research Topic is: Buddhist Traditions Key words related to my Research Topic are: Buddhism, meditation, nirvana

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:

+ ++1. I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana

+2. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? Yes or No No If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here. This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2011) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) 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?

+Needs additional citations for verification, this is important because it allows the reader to check on the facts to see if they come from credible sources and are therefore able to be relied on.

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. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? Yes, it summarizes some basic principles involved in the topic and gives a good explanation.

+4. 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, it is structured very clearly with appropriate headings and subheadings. It only has one picture, but that is understandable since the topic is just a concept. It has the right appendices and foot notes at the end

+5. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? Yes, with all the information provided it seems as if you could get a good overview of what the topic is about.

+6. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? It provides a neutral point of view, it reads like an encyclopedia article. There is no detectable bias in the article.

+7. 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, there are many credible references to scholarly books and journal articles.

8. 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, it is very easy to understand and correct.

+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? No, it seems to be overall unbiased

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

+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? No, it seems to do a good overview of what the topic is about and other themes surrounding it.

+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? It has a good balance of information in sections, what I feel is fitting to the topic.

+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? No, the article has tons of sufficient resources and footnotes.

+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, the edits made were appropriate and necessary for the article. __________________________

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) Earlier today at 3:04

A lot of the authors on the article had specific knowledge on Buddhism and Buddhist traditions, so their authority was credible.
 * Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?)

+Relevance (to your research topic) Quite relevant, it represents one of the important beliefs in Buddhism, which is relevant to their beliefs and practices.

+Depth It went somewhere between surface level and deep information, it provided a well-rounded approach of it and supplied a lot of good information. It was not as in depth as a book would be, however.

-Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) The information format was easy to read and process, very good overall. As we noted in class, the information format of this is an encyclopedia article for the general public-

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

This article taught me about the important main beliefs in Buddhism as well as Hinduism (also compares the two), it brought me more in depth with Buddhism.