User:Evecorado32/sandbox

'''106.25% Good work! (+=correct, ++=extra credit -=incorrect ~=half credit)'''

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Spring 2017

My Research Topic is: Merengue Dance

Keywords related to my Research Topic are: Merengue History, roots, Dominican Republic Part 1:

Examine Wikipedia articles that are directly related to your Research Topic and select a substantive article to evaluate. This could be an article about an idea (e.g., I might choose the one about Trance) or a person (if I were researching Reggae music, I might pick Bob Marley). Answer the following questions:

++I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: "Merengue (dance)" (for extra credit,link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merengue_(dance) )

+1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? Yes or No Yes, there is a warning banner at the top of the article.

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages) This article needs additional citations for verification. (November 2008) The neutrality of this article is disputed. (February 2015)

Write an brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter?

+The issues mentioned in the warning banner are important because it's necessary for viewers to know the information they are reading is not completely trustworthy. It's especially important when someone is writing a paper on a particular topic and they come across an article that may have information they like, but yet again not able to insert it in their paper because they would most likely be giving their audience false information.

Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warning that is in that banner.

+2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?

The lead section of the article is easy to read. It's actually really short and summarizes the key points of the article by giving an on the surface description of the dance and how it originated.

+3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and footnotes at the end?” The structure of the article is clear, though doesn't have many headings, subheadings, images (1), diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and footnotes at the end. It has an adequate amount, just not enough to make the article trustworthy.

+4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? The various aspects of the topic aren't balanced well, it seems to provide a very short glimpse of the topic overall. For example, it begins with a description of what the dance routine consists of and ends with a brief history of how the dance originated. I think this is one of the main reasons why the beginning of this article shows the warning sign.

+ 5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? This article overall reads like an encyclopedia with the exception that it has incomplete ideas towards the end.

+ 6. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc.

The references and footnotes are reliable sources and are pointing to scholarly and trustworthy information. For example, one of the article's references is from the oxford dictionary. I know the oxford dictionary is a scholarly resource as I've read many scholarly papers that cite the oxford dictionary very often.

7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

+a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English? Yes, fortunately, the lead section is well-written in clear and correct English.

+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? No, I have not found any unsourced opinions and value statements that are not neutral. Everything overall seems to inform the reader and not to try to persuade them.

+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? Yes, within the last paragraph of the "History" subheading, the article mentions a sentence of traditional songs but isn't specific to what kind of traditional songs the article is talking about. It left me quite confused. d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? Yes, the article seems to omit aspects of the topic Merengue History.

+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? No. Unfortunately because their's very little sections in this article, (only 2) there's also very little information in both sections. I'm assuming the creators didn't have much to say about this topic.

+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? Yes, definitely! I was amused by how little references this article has. I would like to see more of where this article is obtaining its information.

+g. Look at the “View History” for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors? Yes, as I read the "view history" tab I did notice a little bit of hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respect amongst the editors. This is very unnecessary as I can see the editors are trying their best to get these articles as scholarly as they can be.

__________________________

Part 2:

Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:

+Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History) The last update of this article was November 27, 2016.

+Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) I googled searched one of the authors named Sydney Hutchinson from the reference list and found that Hutchinson is actually an Assistant Professor of Ethnomusicology in the Department of Art and Music Histories at Syracuse University. Knowing Hutchinson has a lot of background information on much cultures music gives me an indication that she's very knowledgeable of where Merengue music/dance began as well. Thus, has the appropriate credentials to write on this topic.

+Relevance (to your research topic) This article is pretty relevant to my topic as it gives a brief summary of Merengue history and that's exactly what I'm searching for. + Depth The article overall doesn't have in-depth information for my use. The background information is very minimal for me to actually become knowledgeable of how merengue dance originated. Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.)

+ The information format for my Wikipedia article is a general audience website. I know this because of the diction of the article and because everyone has access and can edit the article.

+Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) The purpose of this article is to inform me about an idea or event in an objective manner.