User:Mmaurinee22/sandbox

Article Evaluations:

1) This is for the Intersectionality article:

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

No I think they did a good job of staying on track. Nothing distracted me.

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

It did seem to be in favor of the concept of intersectionality, but not heavily so.

Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or under-represented?

Block with an appropriate, reliable reference?

Maybe abelism was under-represented, but it wasn't very noticeable one over another.

Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

I did not go through every single one but they did seem reliable, neutral sources. Some were more biased than others.

Is any information out of date?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

Not that I noticed.

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?

I couldn't find any conversations. It kind of seems to be glitching when I click on it actually, so maybe I can't see it.

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

It seems to be rated with B's and C's. WikiProject Sociology, WikiProject Feminism, WikiProject Gender Studies, WikiProject Discrimination, WikiProject Linguistics, WikiProject Culture.

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

It seems to match up well.

2) This is for the Oppression article:

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

No, this did seem to be a thorough article, nothing distracted me.

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

I mean, it's slightly on the side of oppression being bad.

Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or under-represented?

No, they seemed equal.

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

Yes, the ones I checked did.

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?

From what I could tell yes they facts were reliable and they are somewhat neutral, but mostly geared towards oppression be a negative thing.

Is any information out of date?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

It seemed up to date. I didn't notice anything that needed to 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?

I couldn't find any conversations. It kind of seems to be glitching when I click on it actually, so maybe I can't see it.

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

It's rated with start classes, mid-importance. Wikiproject Philosophy, Wikiproject Sociology, Wikiproject Discrimination.

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

Ours is geared more towards women, but the overall theme is the same.

3) This is for the feminism article:

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

No, this did seem to be a thorough article, nothing distracted me except I did have more of my own opinions about what I think feminism is, but my opinions are subjective.

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

It explains things from a mostly pro-feminist point of view.

Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or under-represented?

No, they seemed equal, it could be more in depth, but for an article it's good.

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

Yes, the ones I checked did.

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?

From what I could tell yes the facts were reliable and they are neutral for the most part.

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

It seemed up to date. Maybe more about gender, and gender fluidity being involved in feminsm.

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?

I couldn't find any conversations. It kind of seems to be glitching when I click on it actually, so maybe I can't see it.

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

I did not see any projects or ratings.

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

It's not as in depth as ours, or as personal, but for an article I think that's to be expected.