User:AmaniSensei/NMAC 3108 Journal3

June 8, 2019: Third Journal
Many of us have heard the phrase you only get one chance to make an impression. I was totally impressed after the evaluation of my Wikipedia article. I choose NPOV tutorial. This is ironic. I decided to performed my evaluation of the article we were assigned to read. An article on how to remain neutral. In other words, I critiqued the article that was critiquing/ giving out the guidelines on how to have a neutral point of view. First and foremost, the layout was very condense and easy to read. Everything was easy to clarify, the article did not leave me confused. Furthermore, the article had a sound argument and appeared very neutral. The article passed everything according to what was on Niklas Göke, “How to Edit Your Writing in Three Passes.”. The article was pretty much head on. Although I expect this from an article that supposed to teach you how to create a neutral point of view. It would be very embarrassing if the article page did not follow the advice it was circulating. Two highlights of this article is that, a table of contents were included and there were no visuals. This is important, because in order to remain neutral one must re-frame from colors. Colors tend to sway people. If I had one complaint, it would be that it did not include a link to a not so neutral article. This would have strengthen their argument tremendously. According to Niklas Göke, it is imperative to enter the state of mind of a "hater". It was great that the article displayed an example of what to do, but it is also important to include an example of what not to do. Advice on not doing something, and showing an example of what not to do are two different things. This is where I believed the article failed; it should have included a link. I recommend including a link under Section 11. This would have been the prefect place to include an example of what not to do. Do not get me wrong this article is probably one of the most neutral Wikipedia pages out there. However, the article still has room for improvement. It is imperative that you "write, edit, review", and then write again. Overall, this article was very solid.
 * Great evaluation on the NPOV article. You evaluated the content, tone and sources as well as made a suggestion for improvement.  Well Done!--Mightymize (talk) 01:04, 9 June 2019 (UTC)