User:Meavefryer/sandbox

(1) How well does the article explain the use of proxy in understanding past climate? For this, you'll want to draw on your understanding of the proxy from other sources (i.e. lecture notes, other web pages, Cronin's text book, etc.). Specifically comment on how well the article address: (2) Are the peer-reviewed articles listed current and appropriate to demonstrate the use of the proxy? To do this, conduct your own search using an online reference database, and identify two peer-reviewed articles that use your proxy. Are these on the Wikipedia article?
 * data analyses;
 * assumptions;
 * strengths and weaknesses of the proxy method.

(3) Make at least two recommendations for improving the Wikipedia article (e.g. could better figures/pictures to be added? More current/relevant references? Other web links?).

Again, leave your evaluation on the Talk page, sign with four tildes...BUT ALSO copy and paste your evaluation to Word, and hand in separately to Carmen dropbox (or print and give hardcopy to Alex).


 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?
 * "Diatons and forams are also used as proxies for ocean temperatures and conditions. The oxygen isotope ratios in their shells are used as proxies for temperature. Also warmer conditions have more of them in the sediment. Also the distribution of the species of these and other sea creatures preserved in the sediments are useful proxies, for the optimal conditions for the most numerous species in the sediment."
 * questionable source: article without peer review
 * spelling error: diatons = *diatoms
 * 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?
 * Where does the information come from? Check the sources. Are they neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Check a few citations & references. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article?
 * Is the page locked? Take a look at Wikipedia's protection polic y - what is good or bad about this policy? How could it be abused?
 * Is any information in the article that is out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?