User:Catherine.duncan/sandbox

When evaluating an article[edit][edit]

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic?
 * Yes, after reading the article, it seems that the information found in the article is relevant.
 * Is there anything that distracted you?
 * No, not exactly.
 * Is any information out of date?
 * Yes, there is no exact date.
 * Is anything missing that could be added?
 * The first thing that caught my eye is that there is no exact date of when this event occurred.
 * What else could be improved?
 * I didn't gather an understanding of the aftermath regarding the 'chalking' event. There is also a warning on the page claiming the article may contain innapropiate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text.
 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article is neutral as it is just reiterating what occurred whilst not persuading the reader to take one side or form a strong opinion.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, there are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I would say that the view point of the students is overrepresented whilst the viewpoint of a non-Trump supporter is underrepresented.
 * Check a few citations.
 * I clicked on all the citations.
 * Do the links work?
 * Yes, all of the linked citations work.
 * Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Yes, each source does support the claims throughout the article.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?
 * I believe that some of the sources are not the most reliable, that being New York Times and the Washington Post as some may find newspapers to not be reliable because they can be biased.
 * Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources?
 * I would say 50% of the information comes of newspaper articles and the over half comes from online journals and forums. For majority, yes the information is from neutral sources.
 * If biased, is that bias noted?
 * No, the bias is not noted.

After evaluating (Talk Pages)[edit][edit]

 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Right now this topic is solely represented from the 'student body voice' so it truly one gives one side. I feel the article would have more power if it opened the mind of reader's allowing for both sides to be understood. The article would then be more knowledgable as it would be filled with more information.
 * How is the article rated?
 * The article is rated at the letter S for satisfactory, standing with a 30 percent.
 * Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * No, not that I am aware of.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Career
Evelyn was hired into a high level technological company, Teleregister, a division of Western Union, in Connecticut.

Personal Life
The daughter of Sam and Rose Berezin, Russian Jewish immigrants who travelled to the United States in the early 1900's. Evelyn's father had experience with formal education while her mother had very little education besides learning Yiddish. Evelyn lived in the East Bronx, New York, with her two brothers, parents, and her uncle. Graduating high school at 15, she was able to attend Hunter College, which had opened tech opportunities to women when the WWII started. At 16, Berezin lied about her age at Hunter College to accept a job as a laboratory technician.