User:Snake in boots/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Appalachian stereotypes
 * Article Evaluation
 * The lead section is one whole sentence long. It does identify the topic, but the sentence itself is not very clear. It doesn't go into important aspects of the topic, or the sections of the article. While it does cover the most important aspects of the topic, those aspects are given very little context. Like, it goes over a brief history of Appalachia, but it's not organized very well, and the author tends to just say things and not really explain them at all. I think that and the lack of context counts as missing content. But the really big thing for me is that it's last section is about Appalachian stereotypes in pop culture, but it doesn't really go into how pop culture---especially media---has perpetuated those stereotypes. The content isn't exactly not up to date, the main thing there is that there's just a lot of examples missing from popular media. It is about a historically underrepresented population and topic though, which is great. I's not entirely neutral. Most of the opinions in there are from sources like professors and stuff, but the article is definitely telling the reader that the stereotypes are harmful (which is true but still an opinion I think). The author says something about an "incorrect theory" which isn't very neutral. It could be an actually disproven theory though, but even then, I'm pretty sure it'd be good to add the opposite view or something. And there are a couple just straight up opinions in there too.  There's a really solid amount of sources that I'd say cover the topic pretty well. Not all of the facts are backed up or cited though. There are definitely some pretty good, peer-reviewed articles on JSTOR the author could've drawn from.  The organization could be improved, which I think also goes back into the lack of context a bit. Instead of having just an overview of the history of Appalachia, there could've been a brief overview of the region that included the history. Without that context it seem like random stuff is just being said, in turn making it feel disorganized, and harder to read.  There are a couple pictures, but there up in the corner, and I didn't really clock them until I was looking for images. The captions are fine, but I wouldn't really say they add a whole lot to the article.  The talk page is fairly busy. Most of the conversations are about how to make the article flow better and easier to read. There are also a lot of suggestions for putting in links and stuff to provide extra information and make stuff clearer. The article is rated C-class on several WikiProjects.  The article could definitely be improved. It lays a pretty good foundation for the topic, but it doesn't feel complete. I've pretty much already addressed the parts that aren't great about them and talked about what could be done to improve it.
 * The lead section is one whole sentence long. It does identify the topic, but the sentence itself is not very clear. It doesn't go into important aspects of the topic, or the sections of the article. While it does cover the most important aspects of the topic, those aspects are given very little context. Like, it goes over a brief history of Appalachia, but it's not organized very well, and the author tends to just say things and not really explain them at all. I think that and the lack of context counts as missing content. But the really big thing for me is that it's last section is about Appalachian stereotypes in pop culture, but it doesn't really go into how pop culture---especially media---has perpetuated those stereotypes. The content isn't exactly not up to date, the main thing there is that there's just a lot of examples missing from popular media. It is about a historically underrepresented population and topic though, which is great. I's not entirely neutral. Most of the opinions in there are from sources like professors and stuff, but the article is definitely telling the reader that the stereotypes are harmful (which is true but still an opinion I think). The author says something about an "incorrect theory" which isn't very neutral. It could be an actually disproven theory though, but even then, I'm pretty sure it'd be good to add the opposite view or something. And there are a couple just straight up opinions in there too.  There's a really solid amount of sources that I'd say cover the topic pretty well. Not all of the facts are backed up or cited though. There are definitely some pretty good, peer-reviewed articles on JSTOR the author could've drawn from.  The organization could be improved, which I think also goes back into the lack of context a bit. Instead of having just an overview of the history of Appalachia, there could've been a brief overview of the region that included the history. Without that context it seem like random stuff is just being said, in turn making it feel disorganized, and harder to read.  There are a couple pictures, but there up in the corner, and I didn't really clock them until I was looking for images. The captions are fine, but I wouldn't really say they add a whole lot to the article.  The talk page is fairly busy. Most of the conversations are about how to make the article flow better and easier to read. There are also a lot of suggestions for putting in links and stuff to provide extra information and make stuff clearer. The article is rated C-class on several WikiProjects.  The article could definitely be improved. It lays a pretty good foundation for the topic, but it doesn't feel complete. I've pretty much already addressed the parts that aren't great about them and talked about what could be done to improve it.

Shapiro, Henry D. “Appalachian Myth.” In The New Encyclopedia of Southern Culture, edited by Charles Reagan Wilson, 196–98. Volume 4: Myth, Manners, and Memory. University of North Carolina Press, 2006. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5149/9781469616704_wilson.51.
 * Sources

Noe, Kenneth W., and Ronald D Eller. “‘Deadened Color and Colder Horror’: Rebecca Harding Davis and the Myth of Unionist Appalachia.” In Back Talk from Appalachia, edited by Dwight B. Billings, Gurney Norman, and Katherine Ledford, 67–84. Confronting Stereotypes. University Press of Kentucky, 1999. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2jcp5m.8.

Massey, Carissa. “Appalachian Stereotypes: Cultural History, Gender, Sexual Rhetoric.” Journal of Appalachian Studies 13, no. 1/2 (Spring/Fall 2007): 124–36.

Harkins, Anthony A. “The Hillbilly in the Living Room: Television Representations of Southern Mountaineers in Situation Comedies, 1952-1971.” Appalachian Journal 29, no. 1/2 (2001): 98–126.

Option 2

 * Article title
 * William G. Frost


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article is extremely short. However, it does cover the most important aspects of Frost's life and contributions to the world. It's perfectly neutral, however not every claim has a citation. Overall it's a good, even if brief, overview of Frost.


 * Sources
 * Drake, Richard B. “The ‘Discovery’ of Appalachia.” In A History of Appalachia, 119–30. University Press of Kentucky, 2001. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt2jcv7t.12 . Klotter, James C. “The Black South and White Appalachia.” The Journal of American History 66, no. 4 (1980): 832–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/1887639.

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources