User:Brennen.d.kar/sandbox

Reference Search
I am possibly going to focus on the article "Noise Control" for improvement. Following are a few possible references that may help improve the article:

Goines, L., & Hagler, L. (2007). Noise Pollution: A Modem Plague. Southern Medical Journal, 100(3), 287–294. Retrieved from https://unco.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=24521631&site=ehost-live

Barron, R. F. (2003). Industrial noise control and acoustics. New York [u.a.]: Dekker.

Natalie Riedel, Heike Köckler, Joachim Scheiner, Irene van Kamp, Raimund Erbel, Adrian Loerbroks, Thomas Claßen, Gabriele Bolte; Urban road traffic noise and noise annoyance—a study on perceived noise control and its value among the elderly, European Journal of Public Health,, cky141, https://doi-org.unco.idm.oclc.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky141

Article selection

 * 1) "Hearing Test" is a topic that has little information and is rated on Wikipedia as "start-class" on the rating scale, meaning that it is just starting and there is room for a lot more information and sources. There could be a section for history of hearing tests, as well as more information on bone-conduction, SRT, word rec testing, and tympanometry. This article is also part of two wikiprojecs: wipkiproject medicine and wikiproject deaf. This article is rated as low importance, which would be a good place for me to start.
 * 2) "Lombard Effect" has a lot of information missing and is rated a "C-class" on the quality scale. This is also a low-importance article as well.
 * 3) "Acoustic Reflex" is another possible article to work on. There is little information and it is also rated as a C-class article on the quality rating scale. It is part of two wikiprojects: wikiproject medicine and wikiproject physiology. There is a lot of information that could be filled in and a lot of place that need references to back up what is said. There is no information about recent research that Acoustic Reflexes about the purpose of acoustic reflexes. It focuses mainly on the long-supported idea that it is for protection from loud noises.

= Article evaluation = I chose to evaluate the article on "Earplug".


 * 1) Everything in the article appears relevant, but the order of topics was distracting as it did not appear to have a logical order to them. The sections seem to bounce around with some topics in separate sections that should be put together.
 * 2) Information does not appear out of date. When NIOSH Criteria for occupational noise exposure is discussed, the most recent version of those standards is referenced and talked about.
 * 3) The article could be improved by following a more organized order. The order of topics should have a reason behind it.
 * 4) The article is neutral and is not biased towards a certain point of view.
 * 5) There are no under or over represented viewpoints. However, as many people in the talk section have had experience with swim plugs, there is more information on swimming protection than hearing protection. Although the information itself is not biased, the topic itself of swim protection is more represented than the topic of hearing protection.
 * 6) The references that are present work and support the claims in the article, but there are several sections without citations such as the "History," "Electronic Earplugs," and "Flight Ear Protection" sections.
 * 7) The information comes from reliable sources such as peer-reviewed journal reviews.
 * 8) Conversations in the talk page are mostly about how much information to give on certain topics as well as people expressing difficulty in finding reliable sources to use for specific pieces of information.
 * 9) This article is part of two WikiProjects, specifically "WikiProject Deaf," and "WikiProject Professional Sound Production". The article has been rated within the "WikiProject Professional Sound Production" as a C-class on the quality scale, and has not been rated within the WikiProject Deaf.
 * 10) The talk page has several people discussing their opinions on the effectiveness of ear plugs, but the article itself does not have much information regarding this. Studies examining the levels of effectiveness of wearing ear plugs should be mentioned. The talk page has discussions that are different from discussions in class because they are mostly conversations from the public consumers of ear plugs, not from audiologists or researchers. Therefore, there is a lot of discussion on confusion about how to make sure an earplug fits and is inserted correctly or if they work at all.