User:Goldpothos

Wikipedia Exercise 2: evaluation of "Sex Tourism" article page

I found this article's talk page to be particularly interesting because there were a lot of disagreements and arguments over potential biases in the article. For example, one of the editors thought something sounded "feminist" and deleted it, and there are on-going arguments on potential "pedophiliac" biases. I think my own personal biases lead me to view sex tourism as a more negative thing because it is practiced in a lot of developing countries where the woman didn't necessarily have a "choice" in the matter, so I was surprised to see a "positive aspects of sex tourism" section on the article.

Overall, I think the article makes a good attempt at trying to keep a hot topic "neutral" and gives POV's to both sides. I noticed there was a lot of debate on the Talk page about creating a separate article for   "Child sex tourism" in efforts to neutralize the tone of the sex tourism article page. It seems like a separate page was indeed created, but even on this Talk page there is a lot of debate over bias @ Wikipedia's neutrality stance.

I understand the importance of a neutral basis for information, but aren't there some things that we can universally agree are "bad," or at least negative/debatable/harmful, like child sex tourism? (even if it is somehow "consensual??) One of the editors argued that calling it "child abuse" was slander because "almost all" workers in the "pubescent sex worker business" participate so consensually … but this author's argument bugs me on a lot of levels - BUT am I showing too much bias as an individual??

What to turn in on your Sandbox by 11:59pm on Th 10/11:


 * Describe how each proposed (new or modified) article meets topics requirements.
 * Indicate how each proposed (new or modified) article meets scope-of-work requirements.
 * Find and share at least one reliable source for each proposed (new or modified) article

Potential topics


 * 1) Rosario Cooper

Chumash Native American who aided anthropologist in recovering the Chumash language from extinction

she wasn't on my original list but I learned about her at the exhibit about the Chumash language in the CP library and decoded to look her up on Wikipedia, and surprise - she doesn't have a Wikipedia page! I think she should have one but I'm worried about "notability" aspect and if I can find enough sources to even write a substantial article....???


 * 1) Mireya Mayor

stub-class article found on "To be expanded or improved" WikiProject Women scientists/Worklist

rated low importance


 * topic requirements: female scientist
 * stub article I would need to expand 5-fold
 * source: https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezproxy.lib.calpoly.edu/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajp.20007

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/search?q=mireya+mayor

2. Shannon Lee Dawdy

stub-class article found on "To be expanded or improved" WikiProject Women scientists/Worklist

rated low importance


 * topic requirements: female scientist
 * stub article I would need to expand 5-fold
 * source: https://www.macfound.org/fellows/31/

3. Claire E. Sterk (rated high importance)

stub-class article listed as high important by the WikiProject Women scientists

https://tools.wmflabs.org/enwp10/cgi-bin/list2.fcgi?run=yes&projecta=Women_scientists&importance=High-Class&quality=Stub-Class


 * topic requirement: female scientist
 * stub article: I would need to expand 5-fold
 * source http://whsc.emory.edu/about/leadership/bios/sterk-claire.html

4. Mary Margaret Clark

stub article rated as high importance


 * topic requirement: female scientist
 * stub article: I would need to expand 5-fold


 * source :http://dahsm.ucsf.edu/margaret-clark-memorial-fund/