User:ECM0815/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit
 * Article Evaluation
 * The title of the article translates to "Inuit traditional knowledge," and the article focuses on applications of this traditional knowledge or "unique cultural insight" in academia and politics. It has the potential to be informative and detailed, but it is very short, with only a few sentences in the "politics" and "in academia" sections," and not every claim has a citation. Additionally, there are very few sources (which can be expected with a historically-underrepresented topic article), and all but one of them are from 2013 or earlier. Despite how underdeveloped it is, the tone remains neutral, and I can see it staying that way if it's improved upon.


 * Sources

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Reconciliation education


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article details a method of education intended to prevent and counter prejudiced beliefs towards marginalized groups among students. Many in-text citations are used, even without any direct quotes, and facts are presented without apparent bias, but there are minimal details and specifics.


 * Sources

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Diaspora studies


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article is a stub, only including an introduction, list of institutes (with one in-text citation), and bibliography with one source. On the talk page, editors appear to argue with each other about what kind of content is right for the article, and it is mentioned that parts were removed for being biased, and through the "view history" function, I can see that when it was first created, it has subsections about the histories of various diasporas. According to the talk page, they were removed not only for being biased but for being more related to the definition of diaspora than the field of diasporic studies. There's definitely a potential for it to be redone and provide further detail, but it would need to be entirely neutral.


 * Sources

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Thematic learning


 * Article Evaluation
 * In-text citations are present, but they aren't used very frequently. The article is organized and written well, but some language may be too technical for the average reader to understand and could easily be simplified. The style, while still effective, is different from other Wikipedia articles-- its subsections are formatted as bullet points, which range from single sentences to paragraphs.


 * Sources

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Cross-cultural studies


 * Article Evaluation
 * Content is relevant and organized well, but certain points are made that lack elaboration and would benefit from some further detail. Of all the articles I've evaluated, this one seems to have the highest number of sources that are scholarly, and they cover both the psychology and sociology aspects of the topic. However, none of the sources are more recent than 8 years old, and while having older sources is certainly important to cover the timeline of the field, the information feels like it hasn't been updated enough recently.


 * Sources