User:JAP09940/sandbox

Peer Review Group:
User:JAP09940/Group Project

//Here's the link to our group discussion

As for where I keep my information, in a word document saved on my computer and flashdrive, I don't really put anything up here. I probably should....

Updates:
Added a book title to the recommended readings section of the El Anatsui page. It's about the seven artists of the Nsukka group, so only one chapter goes over El Anatsui himself so I don't think it counts to be honest. I need to find more articles and books that are just focused on the man himself,

Is the articles content relevant to the topic? Under or over-developed?
The article itself is about a man, and therefore has information about when he was born, what he does for a living, and some of his accomplishments. I feel that the page may be a bit under-developed. I looked at the talk page and it seemed to believe that the article fell in the "biographies of a living person" category and needed better sourcing... or at least that's sort of what I believe it was saying.

Is it written neutrally?
The article itself doesn't seem very biased except for maybe the part of Anatsui taking over the world, which I suppose could be seen as taking a more positive stance towards the fellow?

Does each claim have a citation? Are they reliable?
They seem to, for the most part. Many of the links go to art work that the man has done, and to several galleries that display his art. We also have information from a dictionary of artists (Benezit)? His actual webpage, and what appears to be some interviews and collaborations. I guess they're nice if you just want surface level information about the fellow.

Possible additions:
Seeing as how this is considered a biography page, maybe we can find more information about his life growing up and the possible inspirations he had for becoming what he is today. We could also add some more information dealing with his creations but I don't think that's what we want in the long run,

Is everything relevant to the article topic? Was there anything that distracted you?
The only thing that I sort of raised an eyebrow at was when the four components of Quadrivium were mentioned twice. But maybe that's just me, reading that these components were arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy once was enough. Other than that, everything was pretty simple and straightforward.

Is any information out of date? Anything missing that could be added?
Nothing seems out of place to me... most of the linked articles were from 2015 and 2014, and that's fairly up-to-date in my mind.

What else could be improved?
I wouldn't mind learning more about how this concept was used in medieval times, or at least something more in-depth. I'd also like to know more about what Plato had in mind with creating this concept, I just feel like the article needs a bit more meat to its bones.

Is the article neutral? Any claims that could be considered biased?
Nothing seemed biased to me, the author gave the facts and nothing but the facts.

Any viewpoints that are over-represented or under-represented?
As I stated earlier, I wouldn't mind seeing more about how the medieval world used quadrivium when it came to their schools and the like. Even the "modern usage" section could probably use a little more detail.

Do the citations work? Does the source support the claims?
The links worked and each went to a dictionary of sorts. The Jewish Encyclopedia, Britannica Online, The New International Encyclopedia (1st edition), and several books and school newspapers (Harvard).

Is each source referenced appropriately? Where does the information come from? Any bias?
I believe that they are, they give the author, the date the article was produced, when they last accessed it, and so on and so forth. The information comes from several books (encyclopedias, etc) and journal articles from a few different universities. I don't believe any of these articles contain any bias, or at least none that I can read at the moment.

What kind of conversations are going on behind the scenes? How do they represent the topic?
For one thing, a couple of folks mentioned that the article felt only semi-literate, so they probably made some changes? Others have talked about what comes before the quadrivium, the trivium, and how it might be best to list their aspects in the article as well. There's also quite a bit of talking around astronomy and music on this talk page.

How is it rated? Is it part of a WikiProject?
This article is rated as a start-class and it is featured in two projects: Universities and Middle Ages.

Is there a difference between how wikipedia discusses this topic compared to our class?
We haven't really talked about this concept... so now I'm worried that I was supposed to find something that was related to our class rather than looking through the articles that showed up on the "educational" page. But technically, it is included in the bachelor of arts section, so maybe there's something to it in that aspect?