User:Grace245/sandbox

Article Evaluation
In the article, Music of the African Diaspora, every bit of information mentioned is relevant to the article's topic. One sentence that was stated within the summary overview; "The banjo is a direct decedent of the Akonting created by the Jola people...", distracted me. The article is and remains neutral. There is no biased claims or frames that are present. There are no viewpoints that are over represented or under represented. The provided link citations work well and the sources support the claims made in the article. Yes, each fact that was states is from an appropriate and reliable reference. The information is from books and databases. These are all neutral sources. I have not seen any biased noted. None of the information seems too out of date. The new possible sources added could be more recent and be more of a variety : documentaries, scholarly journals. articles, etc. In the Talk page, there is an argument between combining the Music of African Diaspora and Afro-American Music within the article. The arguement is supported by the Wiki user's knowledge of which countries were impacted by the music of African diaspora. The structure of the article was mentioned. The cross reference of genres (blues, jazz, etc) and describing the origins of African diaspora more in detailed were strongly suggested. The article is rated as "Start-Class" and "Top-Importance". This article is part of WikiProject: African diaspora/ Music of the African diaspora text dump. This Wikipedia article discusses this topic differently compared to how it was discussed in class was by mentioning more about how it impacted other places geographically.
 * 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?
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * 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?
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * 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?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class.