User:Juliacharr/be bold

Article Evaluation

 * Wikipedia article on the Gulf of Georgia Cannery NHS
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Yes! I really appreciated the clear timeline of years and the pictures as well. I thought it was a very comprehensive overview of the building.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * The 410 bus route is now divided in half, with the route to Steveston being renamed 408 Steveston. The article lists it as the 410 bus route.
 * Technically, tours are mostly offered every hour in the high or summer season only. The page lists them as occurring every hour, which is only partially true.
 * What else could be improved?
 * More content could be removed as it is a lot of information on one place.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article is neutral and fact based. There are no heavily biased claims in the article.  It is well written!
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The article is a very fact based approach to the cannery and does not go into any politics. There are larger observations about the canning industry as a whole but those would not be appropriate to put in a wikipedia article.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The links work in the document and lead to reputable and reliable websites that seem neutral in tone. Their claims are supported in the article and the neutral tone seems consistent throughout.
 * 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?
 * Yes the references are excellent in this article. One reference is an easily accessible website that the public can see and read online.  The other is a book which is not as accessible but is well written and reliable.  The book is largely historical fact based and includes many pictures instead of large blocks of text.  In addition, both references seem fairly neutral in tone.
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * No large controversial topics. The most discussion comes from the fact that the page used to read somewhat like a brochure promoting visitation with an overly cheery tone.  Users have edited it to become more factual as well as more neutral in tone.  I agree with other users in that the sections deleted were not necessary for the article's overall message and comprehension.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Wikiproject Canada (start class, mid importance), Wikiproject Vancouver (start class, low importance)
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * No - everyone seems very courteous to one another and discussion remains to the point and productive.