User:MarquisJohnHall/sandbox

= Article Evaluation =


 * 1) Complete the "Evaluating Articles and Sources" training (linked below).
 * 2) Create a section in your sandbox titled "Article evaluation" where you'll leave notes about your observations and learning from the three articles.
 * 3) Choose an article on Wikipedia related to your course as assigned by the Instructor to read and evaluate. For this class, choose one from each of the following three groups for this assignment. As you read, consider the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):

−Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

−Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

−Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in 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?

−Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

−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?

−How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

−How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

'''Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback with four tildes.'''

= Content Gap- Week 2 = Content gaps are parts of wikipedia that are lacking. They are missing information that could be useful and helpful to somebody. Content gaps could emerge due to several reasons. The author of a specific article may not know all there is about a specific point; the author may for any reason may not have the capacity to wrap up a specific piece of his/her article; or altering edits could eliminate parts of an article after it has been done too.

Creating an article on this journal, I would take the steps on :

- Having a brief description of the journal's scope. Explicitly mentioning if the journal is peer-reviewed or not. Not being peer-reviewed is exceedingly rare for academic journals, so this usually means that the publication would be better treated as a magazine.

Other than a brief description I would focus on:


 * Year of establishment and disestablishment
 * Former title(s)
 * Founding editor(s)
 * Language of publication (if non-English, or in addition to English)
 * Mergers and splits with other journals
 * Main journal series or directly affiliated publications
 * Previous and current editor(s)-in-chief (or equivalent position)
 * Previous and current publisher(s)
 * Previous and current frequency of publication

Category:Content