User:Neuscholar/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title: Political dissent:
 * Article Evaluation:
 * - The definition of political dissent provided is clear and concise, giving the reader a good understanding of what this term means. However, there is not much other content in the article, and all of the techniques of political dissent provided offer no explanation of what these are and how they are used in politics; there is simply a link provided to that article.
 * - The tone of the article is neutral and balanced, and the claims and statements made in the article all link to reputable sources.
 * - The article is clear, but too concise; there's not enough information or examples provided on this topic.
 * - The article does not make use of any images or media related to the topic.
 * - There are no discussions on the talk page, and the only thing on this page is the information that this article was a part of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
 * - The content that is here on the article is easy to read and helpful, there is just not enough content or examples on this topic. The article needs to be developed more, with more insight into the methods of political dissent and the reasons for using said methods.:
 * Sources:
 * - Book on the history of political dissent in the United States: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=jZymqT1HmqAC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=political+dissent+in+the+united+states&ots=Rz6iRkhw1R&sig=T6iacAgShOYPasw5K8lzCwZeR4Q#v=onepage&q&f=false
 * - Research article on political dissent in the digital age (specifically through memes in Oman): https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0957926517721083
 * - Journal article on political dissent in China: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/717610:

Option 2

 * Article title: Anti-Federalism:
 * Article Evaluation:
 * - The lead on the article is a good introduction to the topic, providing a clear description of anti-federalism and what an anti-federalist would believe in.
 * - The content is broken up into sections: nomenclature, main beliefs, and history. The first paragraph under the history section also refers to the name of the term, so I believe this paragraph should be removed from this section and moved into the nomenclature section. The main beliefs gives a quick, clear overview of the main beliefs of anti-federalism. I would note that each bullet point starts with "they believed," so it might be worth starting with this clause, adding an ellipsis, and then listing the rest of the statements. The history section provides a good overview of how anti-federalism developed, but could use some subheadings. I would include headings related to the Anti-Federalist Papers, the opposition of a stronger federal government, the opposition of the Constitution and how that led to the creation of the Bill of Rights, and then a section on the end of the party and different parties following after it.
 * - The article presents in a neutral tone, and does not argue for or against anti-federalism and their beliefs.
 * - There is a significant lack of citations in some sections; there are no citations in the first paragraph, and there is a note on the main beliefs section stating that more sources are needed here for proper citing. There are also large paragraphs in the history section that do not have citations whatsoever.
 * - There is one image on the article, and it is a picture of the Articles of Confederation.
 * - The talk page discusses potentially adding Thomas Jefferson and his influence into the article.
 * - Overall, the article has a lot of seemingly good content, but citation issues make it difficult to distinguish if a lot of this information is true. Additionally, the history section could be formatted by including subheadings to make the section easier to read through and navigate.:
 * Sources:
 * - Book on the history of Federalism and Anti-Federalism: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5149/9780807839218_cornell
 * - Law review from Northwestern (not sure if this meets the standards set forth for sources on Wikipedia) on Anti-Federalists: https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/illlr84&id=17&collection=journals&index=:

Option 3

 * Article title: Bully pulpit:
 * Article Evaluation:
 * - The definition of the term here is very solid, as it gives a clear and concise explanation of this term and explains why the word "bully" was used. However, that is about all this article has to offer, as there are no additional paragraphs. Some additional sections that could be included could focus more on how this term came to be used, how and why politicians use the bully pulpit, and some famous examples.
 * - The tone is neutral, as the article simply gives a definition on the term and the origins of this phrase.
 * - The information in this article is all cited using reputable sources.
 * - There is an image of Theodore Roosevelt, the man who coined this term, giving a speech to a crowd.
 * - The talk page brings up how there are no examples provided in this article.
 * - The content that is here is well cited and useful; there just is not enough content on the term, and some examples could help add to this article and give more insight into the term.:
 * Sources:
 * - Journal article on the bully pulpit in the age of social media: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19331681.2018.1485604
 * - Book on how U.S. presidents throughout history have utilized the bully pulpit: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=I3XNCgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=bully+pulpit&ots=WUTbWHX1wb&sig=_VciB92gNejHM4MIGWCCHB1-Cjw#v=onepage&q=bully%20pulpit&f=false:

Option 4

 * Article title: Law of North Carolina:
 * Article Evaluation:
 * - The lead section mentions these different levels of law, but then the main section does not end up referencing each of these. The lead is also weak, as it is only one sentence; the first paragraph under the section titled sources is basically a continuation of the lead, so I think it should be moved up and actually in the lead section.
 * - The content that is here is useful and gives good insight on these different levels of law in North Carolina, but some of the levels mentioned in the first paragraph are not referenced again later in the article. I would also advise that under the local ordinances section, when home rule is mentioned that a brief definition of what exactly this is gets added into this section, as the section does not make that clear.
 * - The tone is neutral and simply states the facts without making an argument.
 * - All of the information in this article is cited, and these sources are reputable books and websites. In the Constitution section, there are a lot of long quotes taken from the sources; these should be removed and replaced with text summarizing what the sources are stating.
 * - There are no images provided in this article, and there are no discussions happening on the talk page.
 * - I think that the content provided, with the exception of the long quotes in the Constitution section, is clear, well-written, and taken from reputable sources. The lead mentions different levels of law, yet not all of them are included in the main paragraphs, so I believe those left out should be added into this article.:
 * Sources:
 * - Law review article on the history of North Carolina's Constitution: https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/nclr70&div=58&g_sent=1&casa_token=&collection=journals