User:CM19-21/sandbox

More in-depth work on the evolution of Music, then click here!

http://web.mit.edu/jhm/www/Pubs/McDermott_2005_music_evolution.pdf

103% + =correct | = mostly correct - = incorrect

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

My Research Topic is:

Keywords related to my Research Topic are:

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: Anime Sound Production. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime_Sound_Production (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)

+2. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? No

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

Write a 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?

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.

This article had had none, so I chose these instead. Video game music

+Its problems are that its parts of the article content aren't summarized enough and date back at around October 2012. Not following the website's guidelines on how to organize it's context and date back October 2012. The most recent around July has it information be original ideas.

+3. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?

Most do summarize parts on what the site about, but can be confusing if one just speed reading the entire thing.

+4. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and footnotes at the end?”

It seems pretty clutter and a little out of place with the extra boxes and only two chapter have sub-chapters while the other 9 don't. The other boxes on the different category seem to be out of place.

+5. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?

It does start with the history and how everything started, but most seem to be in the incorrect order +6. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?

It does seem to show a neutral viewpoint but might use examples that seem to support one side in a few of the parts.

+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.

Most reference found in their seems to be outdated or up to today timeline. Some connect to other wiki page or videos.

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? All seem to be in English with no grammar in it.

+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? Might be trying to say that one company start using video game music were used more before other people.

+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? It does mention companies such as Namco, names such as Hip Tanaka, and video games like Final Fantasy are mention with multiple other people and companies too.

+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?

The date of the event seems to be a bit random, but nothing seems to be to be cut out.

+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?

Contents should be arranged differently, content 1 and 3 should either be together or put next to each other than separating both of them by one content

+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?

The amount of reference it has is enough to make this website be useful for learning more on the topic.

+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?

500 pages of editing between grammer and false information are scatter around. __________________________

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): Last update was this year on October 10.

+Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?): Wikipedia had the right to these, so I can't tell if the people making these site is able to have the ability to create these or not.

+Relevance (to your research topic): Evolution of music, with further information on the topic of video games soundtrack.

+Depth: Brief history, different article connect to towards it, and multiple different references.


 * Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.): Kinda messy, but can be easily avoided over time after looking through these.

+Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?): Information on how video game soundtrack and where it begins as well any reference connect to the source too.