User:Sarahoshel/sandbox

Paragraph: This helps you set the style of the text. For example, a header, or plain paragraph text. You can also use it to offset block quotes.
On the sandbox page where your article is, look to the right. To the left of your search bar is a tab called "More." Click it, and then click "Move." (when creating a new article)

Open the original article in Edit mode. (References and other templates will break if you copy from Read mode.)

Open up the page just as you would open up an article to edit. Underneath the comment you're responding to, type a colon. Each : will indent your response deeper into the conversation. So if you respond to a response, use two colons, etc.

It is crucial that you sign your messages with four tildes to automatically mark it with your username and a timestamp.

A : Highlight your text, then click here to format it with bold, italics, etc. The "More" options allows you to underline, add code snippets, and change language keyboards.

Links: The chain button allows you to link your text. Highlight the word, and push the button. The visual editor will automatically suggest related Wikipedia articles for that word or phrase. This is a great way to connect your article to more Wikipedia content. You only have to link important words once, usually during the first time they appear. If you want to link to pages outside of Wikipedia (for an "external links" section, for example) click on the "External link" tab.

Cite : The citation tool in the visual editor helps format your citations. You can simply paste a DOI or URL, and the visual editor will try to sort out all of the fields you need. Be sure to review it, however, and apply missing fields manually (if you know them). You can also add books, journals, news, and websites manually. That opens up a quick guide for inputting your citations. Finally, you can click the "re-use" tab if you've already added a source and just want to cite it again. Insert: This tab lets you add media, images, or tables.
 * Bullets: To add bullet points or a numbered list, click here.

Ω The final tab allows you to add special characters, such as those found in non-English words, scientific notation, and a handful of language extensions.→←ǎãäঅত

Article Evaluation
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the topic? Is there anything that distracted you? -How the article is written can be a little distracting. For example, "Another reason people move is to gain access to opportunities and services or to escape extreme weather." is worded oddly in my opinion and seems disjointed. Additionally, the article makes reference to a lot of outside organizations, such as the "Global Migration Group", but does not provide much substantial information to go along with these references. Many "big names" are brought up but somewhat at the expense of useful information. Also, I felt that osmosis theory was not explained very clearly.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear biased toward a particular position? -The world systems theory, although it does state both the possible lingering dependence created by consumerism vs the beneficial nature of free trade, seems to be biased in favor of the free trade argument. It has one short line about colonial dependence and talks much more about the influence of free trade.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? -The article puts too much emphasis on Europe as a destination country when it is not one of the main destination countries.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? -Yes, the links worked and, for the most part, the sources supported the claims of the articles.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? -No, some of the facts are missing citations. However, the sources they do use come from reliable and primarily neutral sources such as National Geographic and World Bank Data.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? -Some of the stats are from 2005 and 2006 and 2010-2013, so those could be updated to be more recent. In terms of something missing, for dual labor market theory, the article states that natives do not want to take certain jobs because these jobs present a lack of mobility, but the article does not discuss how these jobs are also seem as "low-status" jobs.
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The conversation about the article starts in 2004 and says that the article is full or errors and should be re-written. A comment after that suggests certain topics to include and it looks like, since then, these topics have been included. Another talk brings up that individual wiki pages exist on nearly all the topics in the article individually and a lot is lost when trying to make such a large, complex issue into one article. (I was thinking the same thing before reading the article)
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? -The article is C-rated. It is part of 7 WikiProjects, such as "Wikiproject ethnic groups and Wikiproject history".
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? -The article does not mention the United Arab Emirates when it mentions the top places for immigrants to go to. Also, the article talks about a decline in interstate migration in the US due to information technology and inexpensive travel, which is something we have not discussed in class. Additionally, we have not talked about osmosis theory in class.