User:Caitlin bar87/sandbox

User:Cbake96/sandbox

= Article Evaluation for "Criminal tradition" = In the first section, they mention Shaw and McKay's work without citing any of it in the first two paragraphs. Also a couple of grammatical errors. They kind of jump right into Sutherland without bridging the three authors. I think a lot of this article is relevant today, but in the first section they just talk about past studies and information. In the second section, the heading doesn't describe the information given there. In the third section, grammatical errors and fragments that don't make sense.

Tone remains pretty neutral. The present viewpoints are underreported here. Most of the links work, but I don't think they are supported within the paragraphs. For example, in the first link after Sutherland, the link goes to a journal that doesn't have a direct cite and also is a generic source for criminological theories, not just Sutherland. Each fact in the article does not have a citation.

There is no talk page for this article. It's within the scope of WikiProjects, but no conversation has been started.

Luke Schriever's comment: Great response to the questions. It kind of surprised me how much grammatical error they allow on these pages. Again, great response!