User:Rene Melendez 3/sandbox

97.1% + =correct | = mostly correct - = incorrect

++1. I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)

Dubstep

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubstep

+2. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? No

(I am using the warning banner for an article that I looked up prior to Dubstep. This warning banner comes from an article named Rave)

This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.

+Write an brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter? The reason for the warning banner is because there seems to be original research in the article. The person that used the information did not properly write in the citation. That can cause issues like plagiarism and it also does not show people where this information was found so it cannot be proven.

Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warning that is in that banner.

+3. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?

Yes it does, the beginning of the article explains the origin of Dubstep and how it grew from the underground scene in South London to it popularity now.

+4. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and foonotes at the end?”

The structure of the article is very clear. There are seven heading with 10 sub headings and alot of images and diagrams throughout the article. There are 121 citations in the footnotes as well.

+5. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?

Yes the topic is very well balanced, all of the information on the subject was comprehensive and flow very well. It gave alot of information concerning the topic.

+6. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?

Yes, the article is presented in a neutral point of view. It mainly gave information on the subject along with some examples of DJ's and radio station that supported the genre. There was not a point in the article where I thought the writer was trying to persuade me of anything.

+7. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc. There was alot of information that lead to interviews and articles that are not scholarly there are about 3 book references in the footnotes though.

8. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

+a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English? The lead section is well written and understandable.

+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? No

+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?

No it does not when it speaks about a certain topic it usually backs it with facts and sources.

+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? No the article seems to speak about all aspects of the topic including its origin, popularity, and artists. e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?

+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? No it has a vast amount of references and footnotes

+g. Look at the “View History” for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors? No it seems like everyone who has written and revised this article has not written anything hostile or disrespectful. All editors of this page have just revised and not disrespected.

Part 2:

Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:

+Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History) The last time this article was edited was January 27th.


 * Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) Some of these authors have helped add to topics similar to this article which shows they have knowledge of the genre

+Relevance (to your research topic) There is a lot of relevance to my topic since Dubstep in a sub genre of EDM

+Depth There was information concerning a lot of aspects of dubstep.

-Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) The article was formatted well. It separated everything that you needed to know about the article into different sections and had a good amoiunt of information for everything.

+Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) To give information on one of the genres of EDM including its history and type of beats. Including its origin and its journey to the mainstream.