User:Jliuvb2/sandbox

97 % TB
My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Winter 2016

+My Research Topic is: Spiritual Dance

Key words related to my Research Topic are: Dance

Part 1:

Examine Wikipedia articles that are directly related to your Research Topic and select a substantive article to evaluate. This could be an article about an idea (e.g., I might choose the one about Trance) or a person (if I were researching Reggae music, I might pick Bob Marley). Answer the following questions:

EC I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dance

+1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? Yes or No If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here. Write an brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter? 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. -No there wasn't any banners on top of the page that I looked up.

+My article didn't have a banner, so I looked up the work "racism" and on top there is a banner that says: "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: repetition, organisation, coherence Please help improve this article if you can. (July 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)" "It has been suggested that this article be split into articles titled Racism and History of Racism. (Discuss.) (April 2016)" Wikipedia thinks that there isn't enough information for the topic "racism", to make it better and more coherence, they would want more information about it. So when someone reads it, there will be more information about it, rather than just one explanation.

+2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? -Some parts are easy to understand and some are not so easy. It summarizes what dance means but they use some words that we also wouldn't understand because we're not dancers.

+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 it looks organized. It tells me different dances, in different cultures. Also, they show us many dance pictures on the bottom, as in examples to show us what dance is like.

+4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? -Yes, this article shows many aspects of how the topic is well balanced.

+5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? -This article is more of an encyclopedia article, rather than a persuasive essay. It is telling you every detail you want to know about dance and any details that are connected to dance.

+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. -All the references looks trustworthy. They all look liked they were from the 1900s, which means the older days they wrote every little details about things. Not only do they have references, but they also have further reading, external links, and notes.

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, the first paragraph and the first sentence was clear.

+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? -No there wasn't "unsourced opinions"

+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? -No, the article writes out the group name and they also give examples after.

+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? -No, in fact they give informations about other cultures dances.

+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? -They are fairly almost the same length for each other.

+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? -No, they actually gave many references and footnotes.

+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? -No, there is not too many parts that were deleted. The maximum someone deleted was ten words. __________________________

Part 2:

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

+Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History) September 25, 2016 (very recent)

+Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) They have many resources and that were trustworthy.

+Relevance (to your research topic) Yes, the article was relevant.

+Depth Gave a lot of information, straight forward and not complicated.

-Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) The information was easy to look at and wasn't confusing.

+Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) To teach and help us learn about dance and other culture dances.