User:ChrisCaron1234/sandbox

Article Evaluation

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in 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?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * 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?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Literature
Everything in the article seems to be very relevant to the topic and it all relates to literature as a whole. I did not find any claims or anything that would make me consider the article to be opinionated. I think that history is a very big part of literature and there can definitely be more history added to this article. The links all work in the citations that I checked and the source does support the claim to the article. A lot of the links go to other definitions from other Wikipedia pages and go in depth about them. There is many problems with the article behind the scenes in the talk page. It begins to talk about how some of the page is racist and how some of the page is biased. Wikipedia goes into every single detail about the topic and we only talk about certain aspects of the topic, so it is interesting to see how much different it is described to us and how much different it is described in Wikipedia.

Publishing
The article is very relevant to the topic. Everything that I read seems to relate to publishing and only publishing. The problem with this article is that it seems to run on because there is only so much you can talk about publishing. I was distracted by how much they tried to expand on this topic. The article seems to be neutral from what I read. The topic is very overrepresented because they go into step by step detail about the topic too many times and it becomes distracting. The citations worked fine and all of them brought me to definitions of the words from other Wikipedia sources. Everything seems to be in date, history maybe can be updated a little bit. The talk page is just talking about things that the article should add to make it a stronger and better source. They talk about how the history section is too short and how the article talks too much about publishing companies and not the publisher themselves. We haven't really discussed much about publishers in class, but I think that the page very well illustrates what a publisher is overall.

Articles going to be used
Doctor of Medicine

This topic can be improved in many ways, first of all, some of the information isn't cited within the article and that needs to be fixed. Also, some of the information isn't relevant to what the topic is even talking about, so removing that stuff can make the article a stronger one.

South America

This topic needs to be updated and it needs extra citations so I think that this could be a very good topic to write on. Some of the big topics that the article talks about are not updated and Wikipedia is asking for help to update them.

Chicago Bulls

This topic needs help with citation, in one section it states that the whole paragraph has no citations and you should have at least 1 citation for every paragraph that is talked about in an important article.

Chicago Bulls

This article needs improvement with all of its citations. Adding to the citations can make this Wiki page credible. It has numerous different pages with a lot of information but no citations at all. Added to these can help the page become more credible. The page also has 2 paragraph titles, but nothing in the paragraphs themselves. Adding to these could finish the article.

Research for Chicago Bulls - Section titled "2007-2008 Missing the playoffs"
Source 1 - http://www.nba.com/bulls/history/alltime_transactions.html

Source 2 - https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/bulls/2013/09/27/luol-deng-contract-free-agency-chicago/2886305/

Source 3 - http://dev.gospelherald.com:81/entertainment/sports/page16.htm

Source 4 - http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/82games_0708.html

Source 5 - https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/2012/11/29/mike-dantoni-regrets-suns-knicks/1734117/

Source 6 -

Draft 1 franchise records and player accomplishments
Since being founded in 1966, the Chicago Bulls franchise has achieved many records. In 55 seasons, the Chicago Bulls have 6 NBA Finals championship trophies in years 1990-1991,1991-1992,1992-1993,1995-1996,1996-1997,1997-1998. Lead by Michael Jordan and head coach Phil Jackson, the Chicago Bulls were the most successful NBA franchise in the 1990's. The franchise has won a number of games including their history. In the 1995-1996 season, they went 72-10, a record that wasn't broken until the Golden State Warriors broke it in the 2015-2016 season when they went 73-9.

The franchise has been host to the 5x NBA MVP Michael Jordan and the 1x NBA MVP Derrick Rose. These have been the only players in Bulls history to achieve that milestone. Along with becoming the NBA MVP, Jordan went on to become the NBA Finals MVP in years 1991-1993, as well as 1996-1998 Michael Jordan continued his greatness on the defensive side of the ball as well. He became the first Chicago Bulls player to win NBA Defensive Player of the Year in 1988, the first year he won NBA MVP as well. In 2014, Joakim Noah of the Chicago Bulls won NBA defensive player of the year, his first milestone as a member of the Chicago Bulls.

In 1985, Michael Jordan became the first Bull to win NBA rookie of the year. In 2000, Elton Brand became the second player in Bulls history to do achieve the award. In 2009, Derrick Rose became the third player in Bulls history to achieve the award.

In 1996, Toni Kukoč of the Chicago Bulls was the first player in franchise history to win the Sixth Man of the Year award. The next player to do it was Ben Gordon in his stellar 2005 season. The NBA Most Improved Player award was given to Jimmy Butler for his improved play in the 2015-2016 season.

Michael Jordan's awards continue when he was Best NBA Player ESPY of the year. This award means he was considered the best player in a given year. Along with that award, Luol Deng won the NBA Sportsmanship Award in 2007, and in 2015, Joakim Noah won the J. Walter Kennedy Citizenship Award.

Coaches in Chicago have had successful tenures throughout their years. In 1967, a year after the team was founded, head coach Johnny "Red" Kerr won NBA Coach of the Year, becoming the first coach in Chicago Bulls history to do so. In 1971, head coach Dick Motta won NBA Coach of the year, and in 1996, Phil Jackson achieved the award along with Tom Thibodeau achieving the award in 2011. In 1988 and 1996, Jerry Krause of the Chicago Bulls won NBA Executive of the year. In 2011, Gar Forman also won the award.

Michael Jordan was the only player in Bulls history to become the NBA Scoring Champion. He won the award 1987-1993 and 1996-1998. This award means that he averaged the most amount of points per game at the end of the regular season.