User:Avanschoorl-hodge/sandbox

Assigned Article Evaluation - Neo-Luddism

 * Article Evaluated: Neo-Luddism

Evaluation Criteria:

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Evaluation: I do not feel it is comprehensive enough. Where i'd really like to dive in further is the contemporary views on neo luddism in the new social media age. I feel that many are leaning into the concept of less technology and the ways in which we combat technology from taking over our lives. The newest generation is already beginning to have a sort of technology aversion based our cultures constant usage.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Evaluation: As stated above, I want to evaluate, using consistent definitions and contemporary research to depict the presence of luddism in society today.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Evaluation: yes, it is neutral. one space in which I anticipate I could struggle is maintaining neutrality. some of today's usage could come off as biased so i'll attempt to maintain neutrality with unbiased sources and fact.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Evaluation: underrepresented is, again, the modern day presence of this. the historical context is ample and needs minimal adjustments.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Evaluation: Yes, the current citations work
 * Talk Page:
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class

Additional Sources:

 * Definition of Luddite: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Luddite
 * Definition of Luddism: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Luddism
 * Simon Fraser University Notes on Luddism: http://www.sfu.ca/~poitras/luddites.pdf

Initial Article Evaluation

 * Article Evaluated: Placebo studies - I had a distinct interest in this topic because i've undergone a medical study during which I was on a placebo. It was intriguing because I did actually see positive results from the study, unbeknownst to me that I was on a placebo. Placebo studies

Evaluation Criteria:

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Evaluation:
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Evaluation: Nothing seems to be out of date because much of the information within the article is historical. I believe that the article is fundamentally missing present-day studies or more detail outside of the initial exploration of the topic.
 * What else could be improved?
 * Evaluation: Same as above.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Evaluation: This article, while limited, is unbiased. The authors seem to keep it very factual throughout.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Evaluation: No, just an overarching lack of information.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Evaluation: All of the links work and are affiliated with very relevant and reputable sources.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Evaluation: Yes, these are reputable, relevant and accurate sources.No biases present in this article.
 * Talk Page:
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There was a recent discussion regarding the fraudulent nature of placebos used on patients.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * There are Nursing and Medicine projects affiliated with this Talk page and has been rated as low-importance for both of those WikiProject sites.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class