User:Tinaszheng/sandbox

Article evaluation

 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Yes, every sentence is directly relevant to the Plomo mummy and there is nothing that is distracting.
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The article is neutral as every sentence is factual and cited. There are no prevalent biases.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There are no viewpoints in this article.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * The first link on the article appears to be broken.
 * 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?
 * Yes, each sentence has a proper citation. Most of the information appears to come from non-primary sources such as web articles.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Nothing looks out of date, but there seems to be many details about the Plomo mummy, e.g. how old it is, method of preservation, cultural significance, that can be added.
 * 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 talk page is empty.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is part of WikiProject Anthropology, and it is rated mid-importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't talked much about it in class as information about the Plomo mummy is scarce.

Team members
We will be working on the writing portion of this assignment.

Group members: Wendy Yang, Abigail Lai, Anna Pan, Rachel Camarena (Section 114, Wednesday 2-3 PM)