User:Knowl8dge/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Shark anatomy


 * Right away I can see that there are citations for certain things such as vocabulary words that lead to other Wikipedia articles. This may be an issue if the other articles are not very credible. Many of the citations are repetitive such as sources 10-15. These come from a .com source and since the majority of the page is shark anatomy, the citations should include more primary sources. It looks like the citations are working when clicked on are are formatted correctly.


 * Skeleton - there is only one source cited and the text seems brief. Maybe there can be some phylogeny tree included to display relevance to Chondrichthyes.


 * Fins- "Shark fins are supported by internal rays called ceratotrichia" doesn't include a citation, but it may be underlying within the other linked citations of the anatomy.


 * Tail- Much of this section links to other Wikipedia articles. "The thresher shark have an extreme example..." This doesn't seem to be neutral.


 * Teeth- The first couple of sentences do not have citations, but it may be linked to the third citation the sentence after. There is little evolutionary information on shark teeth. This could be a great section to reference the evolution of teeth and phylogeny history with other primary sources.


 * Muscles and Temperature- Reference quotations such as "cruise control" and "cold-blooded killers"


 * Internal organs- The spleen and rectal gland is missing information.


 * Skin- This section is short. There could be some more information regarding the evolutionary development from scales and skin.


 * There is a citation missing in the Respiratory system section. Reference 2 is from 1977 and reference 19 from 1985. Could have outdating information.  The talk page discusses that there needs to be a reproductive system of sharks section, and that there was a request for the removal of the "shark tail" section.  The article has been part of Wiki Projects and is rated at "start-class" and "high importance".  I chose to review this article off of comparative anatomists.

Group discussion about sources, plagiarism, and proper paraphrasing

 * Blog posts and press releases are not reliable sources because they are bias, and their goal is to attract readers/make money rather than to necessarily educate with factual information
 * Company websites are not good main sources of information because their main motive is profit.
 * A copyright violation could include not using an open source image, or claiming someone else's work without getting permission for using their work. Plagiarism is using other's words as your own, or copying exact text and citing the source, or not clearly paraphrasing enough and the words you wrote are too similar to the original.
 * Good techniques to avoid close paraphrasing and plagiarism could be to take notes in your personal sandbox with a citation to the source, and phrasing in your own words, or to not copy the original sentence or phrase while editing to avoid plagiarism.

Adding a citation to an article- Shark anatomy
A citation is needed in the Respiratory System section, in the last sentence of the first paragraph. Bottom-dwelling sharks such as the Angel shark use spiracles to take in water for breathing. Rays use spiracles to pump water over the gills for oxygen.

Feedback: Discussion and Adding to an Article

 * Good discussion notes.
 * I missed this last time, but it is actually very encouraged to link other Wikipedia articles as sources. This is particularly useful for terms that require definition. One KEY thing about Wikipedia is that you never want to duplicate content from one page to another, so linking to another page is very useful. I said this before, but as you move forward, you might find that making small edits to multiple pages involves creating links between those pages. It is actually a VERY useful thing to do.
 * This potential citation looks quite good and I encourage you to suggest the change on the talk page and see what folks say.
 * Maybe even just make the change.
 * * Remember to "sign" your work after submission. Even though this is your sandbox and you do not need to do it, get into the habit as it is an expectation for submissions to articles or talk pages.Osquaesitor (talk) 16:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Choosing Articles to Edit
Cat anatomy


 * This Wikipedia page would be my first choice to edit because I have a cat of my own and would like to better understand the anatomy of them, particularly in the spine and legs. This article suggests an edit in the lead section to better summarize the main points, which would be a good place for me to start. Also, there is a citation missing in the Legs section and in many other areas there are lacking citations.

Axolotl
 * Related sources include:, ,


 * This is the second Wikipedia page that I would like to edit. I am really interested in Axolotls and how they are used as model organisms in biology. I am interested and would like to learn more about their capability of regenerating limbs and body structures. There are some citations that are needed to be added, and I think adding a couple of sections would be useful such as a phylogeny in the lead section.
 * Related sources include:, ,

Shark anatomy


 * This Wikipedia page is my third choice since I have already begun researching and contributing edits to this page. Sharks are particularly interesting to me because I would like to learn more about the evolution of sharks and I think the page could use some evolution history added and a related phylogeny section. There are many small sections that are lacking information.
 * Related sources include:, ,

Group work sandbox link
User:Abbieloring/sandbox.group.herpetologist

Peer Reviews Draft 1
User:JDinauer/Group Sandbox - Wikipedia

Hagfish - Wikipedia

User:AlyssaJordan/New sandbox - Wikipedia

Shark anatomy