User:Rtomasd/sandbox

Wikipedia Article Credibility

 * References
 * Websites ( some linkes didn´t work)
 * Articles
 * studies
 * Most reliable
 * most paragraphs are referenced but not all
 * some neautral, some bias but the actual article was constructed to see both sides
 * bias not neccisarily noted in the sources but in the actual article
 * lacks flow
 * Conversations in talk
 * people making changes tell about the changes and are asking for fact checks
 * give the sources they used
 * cooperation between editors to make the article good
 * Rated
 * Part of 4 wiki projects
 * all rated start-class, high importance

Essay: Why Wikipedia Matters for Women in Sciences

 * Learned something new
 * mostly men are editors
 * that they care to have people of all backgrounds to get a neutral opinion and a complete encyclopedia
 * Having good role models for everybody

Policies/guidlines Conflict of Interest

 * surprises
 * how strict it is
 * only written by subjects not corperation
 * not the same as bias
 * no ads
 * Summery
 * If the subject of the article affects you personally in any way you should not write it.