User:Savkisomma/sandbox

Evaluating History of yellow fever
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? -- No, they talked about Barbados having an ecological crisis & I wasn't necessarily aware of the connection between that and the fever outbreak. It wasn't explained well. It also discussed Napoleon Bonaparte's motives during the war, but that didn't have any correlation with the fever either. It also listed in the middle of a paragraph that the disease was featured in a movie starring a specific actress, but there was no explanation of the plot or elaboration on why that was important to that specific time frame they had discussed previously.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? While they didn't specifically talk about a personal bias against a viewpoint on the disease, they used the phrase "worst epidemic" to describe it specifically in the state of Mississippi; however, they didn't explain why it would be the worst at all in a statistical comparison to other epidemics in the area. I would say maybe add the information and change the way it was worded.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? In general, all of the smaller bits could be supported somewhat more, or more solidified. Some information seems as though it is wavering.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The citations I checked did actually work, though some of them simply went to the book's purchase page on Amazon. For the most part, they did support what they were being cited for.
 * 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? Not every fact has been referenced with something totally reliable. Some websites cited were questionable, though almost all of the sources seemed fairly neutral.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? Literally what yellow fever does to people is missing. While it is over the history, a brief description in the beginning could perhaps be given.
 * 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? It seems as though everyone is confused about why the article was even made because it repeats a lot of information about other articles already posted about it.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as a start-class article and it is a part of the WikiProject Viruses.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We actually haven't discussed it yet in class at all.

Compilation of Beginning Sources for Article Evaluation: Natural theology

- https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-theology/

- https://iep.utm.edu/theo-nat/

- https://maritain.nd.edu/jmc/etext/pnt01.htm