User:HannahNRogers19/sandbox

https://www.npr.org/2020/02/10/799979293/how-many-delegates-do-the-2020-presidential-democratic-candidates-have This source gives a basic overview of the statistics for each democratic nominee, which is something that the article I am working on needs updated. It also provides basic, fairly neutral information on how many delegates each candidate needs to win, and what the process of getting chosen as the democratic nominee is like. I would say the only thing about this source that doesn't really fall into Wikipedia guidelines is where it talks about president trump being the likely candidate for the republican party. Likely is not a neutral word choice, so I would replace it with something more neutral when writing my article.


 * Re: Trump as likely nominee, you could reference the Republican National Convention's promise to provide "undivided support" for him: https://apnews.com/4e0d06986b744dd7926cf9c1a970093f Elizabeth.f.chamberlain (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/politics/2020-presidential-candidates.html This source mainly focuses on the candidacies of Biden, Sanders, and Gabbard. What I enjoyed about this article was the basic in depth information that I found out about each candidate. However, what I thought was unhelpful was the obvious bias that the New York Times held for candidate Joe Biden. Calling him "down to earth". I would love to use some of the information found in this article, but I would definitely cut out any biases.


 * Yes, this is great; it looks like the bulleted lists will be really useful for you in fleshing out "campaign information" sections of the article. Elizabeth.f.chamberlain (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/21/politics/2020-democrats-running-for-president/index.html This article was similar in some ways to the New York Times article, but I found it to be much more neutral in its presentation of information. It presented things as they are, and not just as they wanted things to be perceived. I got information on good Biden has done, and on his controversies, and the same is true for the other candidates mentioned in this article.


 * For balance, think about what you can distill down, what you have about equivalent information for, for each of the candidates in the boxes of the article. Remember that any info you add for one candidate, you should add an equivalent kind of info for the others at the same level of the race. Elizabeth.f.chamberlain (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/03/2020-candidates-president-guide/582598/

This article is the most recent and relevant of all of the articles that I looked at, since it was written only a couple of days before. What I really enjoyed about this article in particular is its simple explanation of how the primaries work, and how each candidate is fairing so far. I thought it did a nice job of remaining mostly neutral, and also making the information correct, and easy to understand.


 * Great, yeah. As you continue to work on the article, you'll want to add more and more recent things.


 * One other note: Since you'll be doing a lot of work in a table, you'll want to review Wiki table formatting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Table Elizabeth.f.chamberlain (talk) 02:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)