User:Hawddb/sandbox


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Yes, the information was relevant.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Her struggles as a female in astronomy was heavily represented.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The links that I checked did work and the sources were accurately supporting the claims.
 * 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? Some statements are missing references. The sources that I checked were papers about influential woman in science. Bias was not noted.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? The most recent information that was cited was from 2012. So yes, it could be updated with fresh information. More information about her life after she stopped working with the academy 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? The talk page discusses how the article needs to have picture included. It also suggests sentence structure adjustments.
 * How is the article rated? It is rated C-class, mid importance.