User:Imanimonae/sandbox

88.67 % + = full credit | = half credit - = zero credit

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Winter 2016

My real name is: Imani Blincoe

My Research Topic is: What sparks creativity in the human mind?

Key words related to my Research Topic are: creativity, human mind and brain

++ I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.) Creativity and mental illness

+ 1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article?

No.

+ Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warning that is in that banner. + 2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?
 * Articles must be written without bias.
 * References to authoritative publications are important.

Yes, it summarizes the major key points of the article.

+ 3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and foonotes at the end?”

Yes, the structure of the article is clear and does include various headings, subheadings, and footnotes.

+ 4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?

Yes, the article is well balanced and comprehendible.

+ 5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?

Yes, the article is unbiased.

+ 6. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc.

Yes, the article provides very reliable sources.

7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

+ a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English?

Yes.

+ b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”?

No.

+ c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?

No.

+ d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?

No.

+ e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?

No, it is neutral.

+ f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?

No, it provides plenty of references.

+ g. Look at the “View History” for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors?

There is no hostile dialogue or lack of respect amongst the editors.

Part 2:

Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:

+ Currency: January 28, 2016

+ Authority: The authors used reliable information, references and footnotes.

+ Relevance: The information is relevant to creativity in the human mind because it discusses how people with mental illness can be creative.

| Depth: This is genuinely a scholarly source and goes into great depth to explain creativity in people with mental illness.

- Information Format: + Object: To show that there are cases that support the idea that mental illness can spark creativity, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that without mental illness creativity isn’t already there.
 * scholarly books
 * scholarly journal research article
 * scholarly journal book review
 * scholarly website