User:Mahoganyqueen/sandbox

User:Mahoganyqueen/sandbox

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Fall 2015

My real name is: Harolda Bangah

My Research Topic is:The relationship between Hip- Hop and Resistance

Key words related to my Research Topic are: Hip- Hop/ Rap, Oppression, Resistance,

Next 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:

I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)

Tupac Shakur

Use the criteria from the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure to evaluate the article. (Get your copy from the Reference Desk.)

1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? Yes or No

No.

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

{Caution }} – For messages indicating e.g. that errors or misuse may have wide repercussions.

Write a 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?

My article, personally didn't have a warning banner, however I can see how important warning banner are too important. If the warning like the one above warns us that there are errors I am more likely to take caution with using such information

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 warnings that are in that banner.

2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?

I chose to do an article on one of the famous hiphop icons and the lead section is clear and concise. The first section is always were researchers and wikipedia editors, go into his background, who he was, who he is, and what legacy was left behind.

3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and footnotes at the end?”

Yes, the structure of the article is clear and concise. From the background information its navigates Tupac's life from its humble beginnings to its his rise as a hiphop icon.

4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?

The topics are well balanced and detailed. It covers every major moment of his life and all the events in his life. With such detail, wikipedia provides a comprehensive overview.

5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?

The article is written from an objective point of view rather than a subjective point of view sticking relatively to the facts.

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.

Yes and no, So first of I say no because these references are, for the majority, not based on scholarly articles. However I said yes, in a way, because I noticed sources like BET and Bet is actually the black entertainment television so they are actually credible in the sense they primarily focus on black entertainment.

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 lead section is clear and concise and it reflects the subject.

b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”?

No, the article maintained its professionalism

c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?

No, after Tupac passing they had talked about specific groups and foundations that were created like The black panther

d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?

no, not at all.

e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?

no, not at all

f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?

no not at all

g. Look at the Talk Page 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, not at all