User:Gdsq/sandbox

Task 1 / WikipediaArticle Evaluation >> Reynolds decomposition

% PROMPT

It's time to think critically about Wikipedia articles. You'll evaluate your Wikipedia article, and leave suggestions for improving it on the article's Talk page.
 * Complete the "Evaluating Articles and Sources" training.
 * Read your article thoroughly on Wikipedia.
 * As you read, consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?
 * The only piece of information on the article is a description of the physical meaning of the equation subsequently presented for Reynolds decomposition. The write-up is quite simplistic and terse, not offering the reader any additional lexical semantic resources in order to fully grasp what each term of the equation represents.
 * Suggested action: (a) Link to Wikipedia articles that help the reader understand the mathetical notation; (b)
 * 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?
 * Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * What new paragraph or section would you add if you could?
 * How might you re-arrange the article to make it easier to understand? 
 * How many equations are included in the article? Too many? Too few? Do they overwhelm the article? How might you make the article more achievable for a first-time reader?  
 * How does the way the topic is discussed on Wikipedia compare to how we've discussed this topic in class?
 * Create a section in your sandbox where you leave your notes and review.
 * Choose at least 1 questions relevant to the article you're evaluating. Leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page.  Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — ~. 
 * Choose at least 1 questions relevant to the article you're evaluating. Leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page.  Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes — ~. 

% OTHER OBSERVATIONS __NOINDEX__ __NEWSECTIONLINK__ Category:Task 1
 * The article is aptly categorized as a "Stub", term mentioned during the first WikiEdu training, which means that a significant amount of information may be lacking. Examples of such shortcomings include but are not limited to relevant background information and context, as well as a thorough and accurate description. As a rule of thumb, stubs should be taken with a grain of salt, and should prompt the reader to do their own fact-checking and coduct further research idenpendently.
 * No application examples. This may cause the reader to underestimate the importance of Reynolds decomposition, a concept paramount in fluid mechanics.