User:Obakes95/sandbox

Article Evaluation

 * Article: Mushroom
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Everything in the article is definitely relevant and the authors link out to many different vocabulary terms that are likely not known by the common reader. The article covers identification, classification, etymology, morphology, growth, nutrition, and human use. I wasn't distracted by anything in the article.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article is certainly very neutral - it is largely factual and reads as a very informational piece.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There aren't really "viewpoints" in this article, because it is mostly just factual. The only area that could be up for interpretation is the etymology, but the authors seem to cover many possibilities.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The links are well functioning and the information checks out.
 * 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?
 * Many of the references have doi's thus indicating they are published journal works and reliable. All of the sources seem to be neutral and unbiased.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Considering this article contains more information on mushrooms than I know, I am not sure if it is missing anything crucial, but it seems like the article has been well covered over time.
 * 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?
 * One user mentioned how they thought the psychoactive mushroom portion may be non-neutral because they did not list potential adverse effects with a tone advocating for legalization.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a part of 2 projects: fungi, and food and drink. It's ratings are B-class.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It obviously goes very in-depth on the mushroom whereas we covered more fungi as a group instead of focusing in on one type.

Eucalyptus deglupta
It seems as if the opening description could be improved - as I've come across multiple sources that list different regions for the plant, as well as environmental conditions that the plant is best suited for. Below is a bibliography for different sources I plan to use and what elements they will help with.

Basic facts:

http://www.missouribotanicalgarden.org/PlantFinder/PlantFinderDetails.aspx?taxonid=282890

https://www.gardeningknowhow.com/ornamental/trees/eucalyptus/rainbow-eucalyptus-tree.htm

https://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/483/#b

https://www.cabi.org/isc/datasheet/22622

Self growing/germination:

http://homeguides.sfgate.com/germination-eucalyptus-deglupta-22711.html