User:Mitchell Booth/sandbox

Evaluate Wikipedia Exercise (Heat Transfer Article)

Evaluating Content:


 * While all of the textual information provided was on topic for the sections containing it, there was a single image of Earth's radiation intensity included with the overview section that seemed a bit out of place and perhaps better suited for the Radiation section 2.5
 * To my knowledge none of the information referenced throughout the article has been proven false or out of date as of 2019.4.12. The article contains much more knowledge of the transfer of heat than I had and thus I cannot determine if anything large was missed, however I do think that some mention or reference to the Carnot cycle when discussing heat engines could have been helpful.
 * I cannot think of anything that would improve the article aside from changing the placement of the Earth radiation image and providing a link of reference to the page concerning the Carnot Cycle.

Evaluating Tone:


 * Nothing in the article strayed from the neutral as there were no position based claims or analyses present, only factual explanatory statements.
 * Though the section pertaining to the mechanisms of heat transfer was substantially longer than the section detailing the applications of heat transfer, this is acceptable as each of the applications linked to pages which go into more detail for each application.

Evaluating Sources:


 * Citation 7 provides a link to Thermal-Fluids Central, which itself agrees with the statement that energy transfer is associated with the transfer of masses of differing temperatures and differing locations.
 * A majority of the mentions of topics which themselves have great depth include links to other wikipedia pages for said topics. Assuming the editors of these topics upheld the pillars of wikipedia then the sources should be accurate and unbiased. There was an item that did not have a citation, though the editor recognised this and included a "citation needed" mark next to the piece of information, being "thermal hydraulics."

Checking the Talk Page:


 * The redundancy of the title "heat transfer" was addressed in a conversation between multiple editors and it was determined that a better alternative title for the page could have been "thermal transfer."
 * The article was rated as C-class and seemed to receive quite a bit of backlash upon its initial posting, and also is listed as a Level 4 Vital Article in Science, physics.
 * Within the opening statements of the article there is a misnomer in calling thermal energy heat, when we have discussed previously in the 1X5 series of chemistry classes that heat is instead the transfer of energy. This was recognised by many other editors and seems to have been discussed in length already.

Article Selection

Binary Chemical Weapon Article


 * The statements made regarding the legality of binary chemical weapons are not out of opinion and are objective. Further descriptions of uses of binary chemical weapons throughout history are only described factually, and the author does not attempt to draw conclusions for the reader without including support from external groups.
 * This article only has a single citation that references an existing article that merely provides an assumption about the history of binary chemical weapon usage. There are not yet any cited sources pertaining to the mechanics behind binary chemical weapons and the provided explanation is rather brief.
 * There are only a few examples of binary weapons listed in the article, and these examples are only given very brief explanations that do not discuss the actual reaction between the precursors and why it is able to be weaponised. This would need to be improved upon should this article be edited.

Binary Explosive Article


 * This article remains neutral in tone throughout its length, though its focus is primarily on the legality surrounding binary explosives and not common examples or their mechanisms. This would be improved upon by detailing the reaction mechanisms behind the binary explosives in this article and explaining how they are differentiated from other explosives through their reaction mechanisms.
 * While this article features more references and citations than the binary chemical weapon article, all of the sources provided historical facts and legal statements. There are not yet any sources pertaining to the mechanism behind common binary explosives.
 * The article does link to the pages for some of the explosives mentioned to allow for further investigation into the individual methods of operation by the reader, but it would be better if there were examples of the mechanisms listed directly in the articles to help reduce the need for users to jump between articles to view the reaction mechanisms.

Psychochemical Warfare Article


 * The primary goal of this article seems to be to detail the history behind psychochemical warfare, and in doing so the article does not provide any explanation as to how typical weapons of this nature affect the mind on the chemical level. This would need to be imroved upon as the way the weapons take effect is an important part of understanding and kind of warfare.
 * There are citations throughout the article, but again the citation are only for following the history of psychochemical warfare and not the way it works as there is no discussion of the methods of operation of the weapons present. Explanations of the goal of psychochemical weapons with regards to biochemistry, even on just a very general level, should be present on this article so that viewers will be able to understand not only the history behind psychochemical warfare but the ways its weapons work as well.