User:Dmlcx9/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Rachel Lloyd (chemist)

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

Everything in the article is relevant to Rachel's life, but I was curious about what things happened in her life between the years 1865-1876.

• Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

Although the article seems fairly neutral, it mostly focuses on Rachel's schooling days and her studies, without much focus on anything else.

• Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented?

A viewpoint that I thought was underrepresented was what Rachel did to help other women in furthering their education in chemistry. Seeing as she went to the only school that allowed women to get a doctorate in chemistry, you would think she would have been more influential to other women at the time.

• Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

The links work and they provide evidence to support what the article is saying. I did notice that one of the links that was on the article was in German. They weren't many links during her early life.

• 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?

The references that were used were neutral and reliable sources. I felt that there weren't enough sources on her early life and focused on her studies and time at the University of Nebraska.

• Is any information out of date?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

There is a period of time between her early years and when she started to going to school in the summer at Harvard that isn't talked about.

• 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 have been recent conversations on the Talk page about the gap in the article between 1865-1876, how getting a doctorate in chemistry affected other women in her field.

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

The article is rated as a Start-Level class and is a part of the WikiProject Women Scientists.

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

It shows that women were fully capable of doing significant things in science as men were, but they weren't as well known for their work as others during the same time.

• Why I chose this article? What is missing? What do you want to add?

I chose this article because the article was interesting to me and I saw things that I could possibly add. There is a 11 year gap in her life that isn't mentioned. I would like to add the extent of what impact Rachel had on other female chemists pursuing higher education.

• Two possible sources:

Mark A. Griep (2018) Forgotten Chemistry Time Capsule Revealed the Stories of Two Early Female Chemistry Professors.

Tarbell, Ann T.; Tarbell, D. Stanley (1982) Rachel Lloyd (1839-1900): American chemist.

Women in Chemistry
While other fields were becoming less dominated by males, such as medicine and botany, the physical sciences were still very male dominant. No women were accepted to partake in doctorate level chemistry programs in America despite being accepted into other doctorate programs, but the University of Zurich was more accepting of women into graduate studies. Because of this, Llyod went on to be not only the first American woman to receive a doctorate in chemistry, but the second woman in the world to receive one only after Julian Lermontova. Llyod was also a member of an organization that wanted to expand upon opportunities for women involved in the sciences called, Science Committee of the Association for the Advancement of Women.