User:Rachelcrawley2/sandbox

Article evaluation :

Question 1 -> Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

In the Wikipedia article that I read and reviewed on " Ted Nolan " I found that for the most part it was all relevant to my topic, except for I personally felt that there was no need to add in that "Ted's relationships with goaltender Dominik Hasek and general manager John Muckler were strained" there was really no relevant information related to playing hockey in that statement. I also feel that they didn't need to add in about his summer travels and how Nolan traveled widely during the summer. Which also had nothing to do with hockey. But overall this article is very relevant and there is lots of information relating to his hockey career that is written very clearly and is well done.

Question 2 -> Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

In this article on Wikipedia on " Ted Nolan " it goes into great death on the teams that he was apart of and coached after he was done his playing career.I feel that there should be more information on his "NHL Career" and playing career, since there is only one paragraph representing his playing career and there is many of his coaching career. This article talked about how Ted was a victim of racial harassment, but I feel like they should go into more depth on why this happened ? And what they did about this huge issue?

Question 3 -> Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

The Wikipedia article "Ted Nolan" has its information coming in from all kinds of different reliable sources such as ; news articles, the official site of the hockey hall of fame. But it also has some information coming in from other Wikipedia pages, and their could be a few problems arising from this - they need to make sure that all the information from these pages are reliable and neutral sources as well.