User:Cmoon27/sandbox

= Article Evaluation: Enriquillo =

Evaluating Content
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

-The content of the page is all relatively related to Enriquillo.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

-There are two sections which are extremely underdeveloped- "In Modern Culture" and " Lago Enriquillo"

What else could be improved?

-The article in general could use more content. Additionally, the author did not articulate his thoughts very well. Rewriting this article should be considered. Very little is written about the revolts he led, as well.

The lead section is poorly done. There is little to no mention of what will be discussed in the subsequent sections.

Evaluating Tone
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a certain position?

-The article is neutral

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

-No

Evaluating Sources
Do the links to the citations work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

-Yes, the citations work and are relevant.

In 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, some of the references are simply links to unreliable websites. These sources may take a neutral tone in relaying information to the reader, but there is no way to know the credibility of the author.

Checking the Talk Page
What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent the topic?

-There are no conversations going on about this.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects

- The article is rated Start-Class, low-importance. It is apart of the following WikiProjects: WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Caribbean/ Dominican Republic, WikiProject Haiti, and WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas.

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

-There is no mention of controversies surrounding Enriquillo.

= Article Evaluation: The Handmaid's Tale =

Lead Section
Basic information about the book is provided in the lead section. However, the lead section fails to summarize the contents of the entire article. The leading section leaves out the author's intention to write about the main characters and setting (large portions of the article) in subsequent sections.

Background
The background is found in the middle fo the article and could be moved to the beginning of the article for more clarity. However, there is no outstanding evidence of bias or author interpretation inserted into this section. The section was, overall, very informative.

Summary
There is no outstanding evidence of bias or the author's voice in the plot summary. This summary is not concise.

Genre/Style
"The Handmaid's Tale" is a work of speculative fiction. The sources do not draw any connections to Atwood's other works. This section of the article only really discusses the book's characterization as speculative fiction as opposed to science fiction.

Analysis
The book was initially disliked by critics because they believed it did not do a great job in representing feminist, racial, etc... issues. Additionally, it is a highly challenged book in the US educational system with many parents and administrators banning it from their school libraries due to mature themes. On the other hand, for those who liked the book such as literary scholars, they believed it was powerful and appropriately depicted a very possible future for the United States in the 1980s. This book is usually included in Advanced Placement curriculum in high schools.

Publication
The book was published in 1985 as a hardcover book. The book is now available in all formats. There are many different variations of art on the cover of this book. Most versions include a depiction of a handmaid dressed in red with her white bonnet. It is unknown which languages the book has been translated into.

Reception
"The Handmaid's Tale" was met with mixed reviews. Some critics believed it did a poor job in highlighting real world issues such as sexism and racism. Others believed it was extremely powerful because of its depiction of events that could possibly occur in the United States. The book received many awards directly after its publication date. Atwood won the Governor General's Award for English-Language Fiction (1985), the Arthur C. Clarke Award (1987), Commonwealth Literature Prize, and the Welsh Arts Council International Writer's Prize. She was nominated for the Booker Prize (1986), the Nebula Award (1986), and the Prometheus Award (1987).

Others
More should be written about race in this article. There is a large scholarly debate available regarding Atwood's omission of racial issues.

= Compare and Contrast Articles: Fun Home and The Handmaid's Tale =

Differences
There are many obvious differences between the Fun Home article and The Handmaid's Tale article. First, Fun Home has been given the rating of FA-Class, high importance and is a featured article. Additionally, the article and author are frequently praised by users on the Talk Page. On the other hand, The Handmaid's Tale has been given the rating of C-Class, high importance. Users frequently critique the article and the author's choices on the Talk Page. Second, the Fun Home article is extremely concise with clear organization of ideas and a plethora of sources and citations. However, The Handmaid's Tale article is extremely disorganized and lacks content in certain sections. Additionally, there are irrelevant topics discussed in certain sections. For example, under the "Setting" section, the author includes extensive information about the classification of women and their day-to-day lives. Also, the article lacks brevity. When viewing the article on one's laptop, the "Content" box alone fills the entire length of the screen of the device. Also, there are only two pictures included in the entire article, and one of them is a picture of the cover of the book. There should be more media.

Comparisons
Media, when presented, on each page is very useful and aids in giving the reader a fuller understanding of the novel and memoir. Both authors provide an extensive list of references (In the case of The Handmaid's Tale, whether the actual citations are sufficient or not remains another story).

Fun Home: Possible Critiques?
After carefully reading Fun Home, aside from some minute grammatical errors, there are appears to be very little one could correct in this article. It is sound in all aspects. The content is relevant and full. The article exhibits no bias and is neutral and informative. The sources and citations are efficient and neutral, as well. Additionally, all information is relevant and concisely organized.

= Wikipedia, Phase One Activity =

General Observation
In The Handmaid's Tale Article, there are irrelevant topics discussed in certain sections.

Concrete Point of Evaluation
Under the "Setting" section, the author includes extensive information labeled "Legitimate Women" and "Illegitimate Women" with additional subfields about the classification of women and their day-to-day lives. This information is irrelevant to the setting of the book.

Actionable Item
These classifications of "Legitimate Women" and "Illegitimate Women" along with their subfields should be granted their own section in the article. The section could perhaps be named something to the effect of "Dynamics of the Society" or "Analysis".