User:Mharri49/sandbox

= Article Evaluation: Mont-Saint-Michel =

Evaluating Content
The article was fairly on point with the topic, there were a few distracting grammatical things but content wise it was concise. The authors writing style was a little hard to follow sometimes, they seemed a little scatter brained when they wrote. The article did not always flow, and seemed to be broken paragraphs not a fluid piece of writing. There were also some sections that required further explanation and evaluation. They were very brief with few detail or backing up of their information. Some sections were full and informative however.

Evaluating Tone
The article was objective, they did not use any biased or opinionated claims when describing the island. This made the article easier to read, and made it educational and informative not just a personal review. There were no viewpoints that were underrepresented per say, however, to reiterate they could have elaborated on multiple sections to make it more informative.

Evaluating Sources
Some of the sections in this article were in need of more sources to support the information they were presenting. They had a lengthy list of sources at the end of their article, but there definitely needed to be many more. I could not judge the accuracy, reliability, or bias of lots of these articles because many of them were in other languages (I assume French).

Checking the talk page
There is a lot of communication on the talk page regarding suggested changes to the article. There are comments about missing information, information people wish they would make sections about, and adding graphics to support the article. Many of these comments, while constructive information are fairly opinionated and biased, and some are rude in their tone towards the author. The article is rated B-class for mid to low importance, and it is part of seven Wikiprojects. The difference in this article I have noticed from what we focus on in class, is that the article does not really focus on architecture. It focuses on composition, general information and geological information; they also don't talk much about establishment and the timeline of the city.

= Article Selection =

Possible Topics
Mont Saint Michel

Michelangelo

Basilica of Saint Peters

Mont Saint Michel Abbey
http://www.visitmontsaintmichel.com/

https://frenchmoments.eu/mont-saint-michel/

https://www.ot-montsaintmichel.com/en/histoire.htm

I want to focus on the abbey and how it is a symbol of the city.

Michelangelo
https://www.history.com/topics/renaissance/michelangelo

https://www.michelangelo.org/

https://healthresearchfunding.org/3-major-accomplishments-of-michelangelo/

I kind of wanna focus on his religious contributions.

Basilica of Saint Peters
I want to focus on how it displays power and brought the catholic church to power.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Saint-Peters-Basilica

http://cathedralphila.org/

http://www.vaticanstate.va/content/vaticanstate/en/monumenti/basilica-di-s-pietro.html

https://thecatholictravelguide.com/destinations/italy/italy-rome-catholic-shrines-places-interest/rome-vatican-city-saint-peters-basilica/