User:Martinciera1/sandbox

Article evaluation

Women's sports

1.) I got distracted on the subtitle relating to Muslim women and its just amazing to me that they are now being accepted into sports in the clothing they want to wear because of their religion. Was it no accepted to be fully clothed and participate in the Olympics due to not meet societies standards? Ridiculous. Everything within the article is relevant from different types of women participating in sports from religion to culture and just women in general and its very repetitive on women equality.

2.) The articles seemed very informative and neutral. It wasn't biased but it seemed very informative to prove everything that women have done and the point of equality no matter the sex.

3.) Women equality isn't underrepresented nor is it over-represented (even though so people may think so). This is a topic that has been going on for years that has slowly made progress but is still in need of a lot of work.

4.) The citations I checked, the links worked as well as the articles supported the actual topic in the Women Sports article 100%.

5.) It is not biased and are neutral sources. Most of the article where things are cited are reliable references.

6.) For the Muslim subtitle, women in sports from 2015-2017 can be added due to a lot of Muslim Olympians who were swimmer winning the Olympics. All of this article is basically out of date.

7.) There is just one conversation and the person is saying that the article is basically pointless and doesn't prove anything and it is helpful due to the time it was created but not now in 2017.

8.) It is C-Class rated. It is four wiki projects one about feminism, sports, studies, gender studies.

9.) Its not really different but it is sectioned to some things we haven't talked about like the religions, countries, and history in sports.

.Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * 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 * Is any information out of date?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?