User:Jake and Bake101/sandbox

Wikipedia Evaluations

"Privilege" Article

While not every fact is referenced from a reliable and credible source, overall the article does a decent job of citing reliable sources such as academic papers. However, some of these papers are merely the musings of a professor instead of a conclusion based off experimentation/ data collection. There is some citing of newspaper articles from media organizations such as The Guardian and New Yorker.

The talk page is generally disagreements about bias in the article. Many people have noted that the article's language "portrays privilege as an objective fact rather than a social theory".

The article is rated "start-class", and is apart of two Wikipedia projects: Sociology and Philosophy

"For Wikipedia, the Doctor is in... Class"

This was an interesting article describing how so many people search Wikipedia articles to learn about various diseases. The article describes how a professor has been assigning his medical students to update and improve the many Wiki articles about medicine.

"Reliable Sources and Undue Weight"

This is a Wikipedia guideline concerning how much space should be allocated to different viewpoints on an article. Honestly, I was not surprised by the content of this article. While it may seem unfair to viewpoints held by a minority of people, I think that viewpoints with more reliable/credible sources should be given more space.

To summarize, the guideline states that more popular or significant a viewpoints should be given more space, whereas viewpoints held by tiny-majorities should not.