User:Cewiens

Article Evaluation

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? I do not believe that there is any information in the article that in not relevant, but it does distract me that some of the paragraphs jump from topic to topic. I think that some of the paragraphs need to be divided into different paragraphs.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? This article is neutral for the most part, it does make some comments in the first paragraph that someone could take as being biased, but I do not believe they hurt the article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? no
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes they do work, one you have to buy a subscription to view the citation. It does however need more citations for verification, and that is listed at the top of the article.
 * 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? no, this question confused me.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? It needs more citations that you can verify the facts with.
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? there are no conversations on the talk page, but it does say that the article is a stub-class and of mid-importance.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? it is a stub, mid important rating, and it is part of the wikiproject Politics.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class (if applicable)? NA