User:Jthomas98/sandbox

Week 2: Article Evaluation

From the Article Evaluation training module, I learned that sources such as press releases, official websites, and self-published sources are not good sources to use for a Wikipedia article. I also learned that, due to copyright information, you cannot add significant contributions (i.e. multiple sentences) from reliable sources into a Wikipedia article.

The article that I chose to evaluate is: Tuskegee syphilis experiment


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Yes, the information in the article is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes, the information remains neutral throughout the article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The viewpoints seemed to focus more on the doctors and others involved in the experiment instead of the patients.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Yes, from the few links that I checked, they all work. The sources do support the claims of the article.
 * 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?
 * There are a variety of sources used throughout the article that support the facts referenced. After inspecting the "References" section of the article, the sources seem neutral and scholarly.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * The oldest source that I found was from 1978. For the most part, though, the majority of the sources included are from the last 10-15 years.
 * 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?
 * There are numerous documented conversations about the article under the Talk page. Conversations range from adding more information to the article, adding sources in, to changing around the Title and removing information.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a part of 6 differen WikiProjects and has a B-class rating.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The Wikipedia page added more conversation about how the Tuskegee experiment has been talked about in popular culture. However, the article aligns much with Susan Reverby's Examining Tuskegee: The Infamous Syphilis Study and Its Legacy that we read for class.

Week 3:

Notes on improvements for the two articles chosen to revise:

Maternal mortality in the United States

From this article, I would add more content to the "Causes" category, focusing on the different aspects that affect the maternal mortality rate for African American mothers. Even though there is a "Discrimination" Tab with three subcategories: "Racial disparity," "Economic disparity," and "Social disparity," I would also add information about to the "Prevention" category.

Content to add:


 * Black maternal mortality exists across socioeconomic lines; black maternal mortality affects African American women regardless of their socioeconomic status.
 * Sources to support the claim that many women of color cannot afford better care
 * Sources to support the idea that African American women have a higher chance of suffering from maternal mortality because of the daily societal stresses caused by being African American.
 * Information and sources to support the idea that African Americans do not receive the same medical care and urgency as white American citizens.

Infant mortality

From this article, I would add more information to the "African American" subcategory under "Epidemiology" "United States."

Content to add:


 * Sources to support the idea that African American women suffer from higher infant mortality rates because of daily stresses related to being an African American woman in the United States: racism, sexism, poverty (in some cases)
 * Different ways that the United States is trying to reduce the high African American infant mortality rates.

Bibliography:

Howell, Elizabeth A., Natalia N. Egorova, Amy Balbierz, Jennifer Zeitlin, and Paul L. Hebert. 2016. "Reports of Major   Impact: Site of delivery contribution to black-white severe maternal morbidity disparity." American Journal Of Obstetrics And Gynecology 215, 143-152. ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost(accessed April 16, 2018).

Headley, Adrienne J.. “Generations of Loss: Contemporary Perspectives on Black Infant

Mortality.” Journal of the National Medical Association 96.7 (2004): 987–994.

Mary O. Hearst, J. Michael Oakes, Pamela Jo Johnson; The Effect of Racial Residential Segregation on Black Infant Mortality, American Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 168, Issue 11 (1 December 2008): 1247–1254. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwn291

Rodriguez, Cheryl. "Mothering While Black: Feminist Thought on Maternal Loss, Mourning and Agency in the African Diaspora." Transforming Anthropology 24, no. 1 (2016): 61-69. doi:10.1111/traa.12059

Rousseau, Nicole. “Social Rhetoric and the Construction of Black Motherhood.” Journal of Black Studies 44, no. 5 (July 2013): 451-471. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24573096