User:Pisac1/sandbox

Evaluate a wikipedia article: Most of the information included in the wikipedia article, "Business Unionism," is relevant to the topic itself. The first paragraph introduces the definition of Business Unionism, as well as its origins. Then in the middle of the second paragraph, "Hyman (1973)" and "Hoxie" is introduced unexpectedly. There is no background information on these two topics nor was there a citation, indicating proper sourcing or linking other pages. This made it very confusing as a reader and made it difficult to piece the information together.

The "Business Unionism" Wikipedia article remains neutral throughout its entirety, but includes some opinionated statements in one of its sections. In the "Politics" section at the very end of the article it states that, "Business unions tend to only use strikes to exert and maintain their bargaining position." The use of the word "tend" suggests that the statement may or may not be true, and is generalizing something instead of presenting it as a fact. The section also includes the statements, "Although members tend to be "liberal" politically. It is believed..." The word choice used in this section such as "tend" and "believed" does not offer hard driven facts and information, but rather a passive idea with little evidence.

The links that I tried in the article do work, so that was a portion that was executed well. It supplies the reader with a connection to the primary source, as well as a gateway to get information on related topics. On the talk page, several users commented on an issue that the article presented. In the article, the labels of business unionism and company unionism were interchanged, when they should not have been because they do not mean the same thing. The problem seems to have been reviewed and edited, so the inaccurate information no longer presents itself as an issue.