User:Piledriver Waltz/sandbox

First draft of the article located in second sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piledriver_Waltz/sandbox_2

Article Evaluation
I will be evaluating the Chile–Mexico Free Trade Agreement article.

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

Yes, everything in this article is relevant. However, considering that the article is only three sentences long, the problem is not relevancy, but scale.

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

Yes, this article is completely neutral. It simply states the bare facts: that a free trade agreement was signed between Chile and Mexico on signed on April 17, 1998; and that it came into effect on August 1, 1998.

-Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

No viewpoints are overrepresented or underrepresented, considering that there are no viewpoints presented in this Article. Only three short, factual, sentences.

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

Only one citation is used, which works. It is a link to "adana.cl" - a Chilean government website which was accessed through "Wayback Machine". The website is in Spanish, but I assume the contents support these uncontroversial, factual claims.

- '''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?'''

The three facts are supported by this one source. It is appropriate, and considering it comes from a government website, it is also reliable. Although the source might be biased, these three facts - consisting of names and dates - are immune to bias.

- '''Is any information out of date?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

No, the information which is stated is not out of date. This article is a huge stub, and off the top of my head, these topics can 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?'''
 * The history of Chilean-Mexican economic relations
 * The contents of the trade agreement
 * The interests/viewpoints of the governments involved. Were the previous governments (of Mexico primarily, as Chile has been slanted heavily towards Neo-Liberal policies since the rise of Pinochet) opposed to establishing a free trade agreement?
 * What were the effects of this free trade agreement?
 * Interestingly, my friend Francis told me that Chile has the most free trade agreements of any country in the world! [Citation needed] ;)

There is just one comment from an editor detailing their changing of the link of an external source

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

It is reviewed as a stub. It is part of three WikiProjects - Chile, Mexico, and trade

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

While discussing free trade agreements in class, I don't believe we have touched on this one in particular. The article is a stub and does not elaborate beyond the bare facts at all. There is a fullerSpanish article which is likely worth drawing upon.