User:Samanthalee29/sandbox

hello sandbox

Assignment 1:

I think it is interesting to look at the climate change article from a user/editor perspective. I chose to especially focus on the headings and subheadings and the way they chose to separate topics of climate change. Almost every fact has a citation, basically every sentence of the article has a number behind it which is important and most, if all, links work. I think that especially for the Climate Change page it is important to have your facts in order because of how highly disputed it is in politics. Many people looking to find more information may go to Wikipedia to learn more about it, and if the facts aren't cited properly on Wikipedia, then the idea of it is less credible.

I also chose to read the "Effects of climate change on plant biodiversity" page. I thought this was an interesting page because it isn't necessarily a name of a topic that can just be listed and sourced from other pages very easily with such a long name. It is also very specific which can be good for people looking for more specific information pertaining to plant biodiversity. This page definitely had a lot less information, and did not include as much background in the first section as Climate Change did. Lastly, the citations are not specific to each sentence, they are just generally spread out. They put the citations at the end of the paragraph.

Lastly, I read the "Regional effects of global warming" page. This page was interesting. It was well cited at the end of the page, but the beginnings did not have any citations at all. It seemed like two separate people wrote it. I did appreciate how it was split up by region and I thought they did a good job covering each region. The first half of the page seemed more biased because of the lack of citations.