User:Uhmss/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

 * Wattpad
 * Article Evaluation
 * There is some out of date information, some statistics are old. Some of these statistics are also not the same statistic as the sources they were cited from, which might be misleading.. It also seems like an article lacking expansion on its details, some aspects of the article are disjointed. The sub-headings are distracting because they don't explain why certain information is there and how relevant it is to the article in general. Some subheadings could be consolidated to make them have more detail, and make the article more cohesive. A majority of the sources seem to come from Wattpad itself which could possibly be biased, so I do not think this article is very neutral.
 * There is some out of date information, some statistics are old. Some of these statistics are also not the same statistic as the sources they were cited from, which might be misleading.. It also seems like an article lacking expansion on its details, some aspects of the article are disjointed. The sub-headings are distracting because they don't explain why certain information is there and how relevant it is to the article in general. Some subheadings could be consolidated to make them have more detail, and make the article more cohesive. A majority of the sources seem to come from Wattpad itself which could possibly be biased, so I do not think this article is very neutral.


 * Sources

Option 2

 * Article Evaluation
 * Sources
 * Sources
 * Sources

Option 3

 * Environmental Engineering
 * Article Evaluation
 * The definition/ leading sentence could be changed from being a job type, since Env. eng is just not a job type. The article was an okay read, and was neutral. The citations were also fine, but were not attributed to every claim.
 * The definition/ leading sentence could be changed from being a job type, since Env. eng is just not a job type. The article was an okay read, and was neutral. The citations were also fine, but were not attributed to every claim.


 * Sources

Option 4

 * Max Verstappen
 * Article Evaluation
 * Some important claims did not have citations, but the citations used for other claims look like reliable sources. The article seems to be written neutrally.
 * Some important claims did not have citations, but the citations used for other claims look like reliable sources. The article seems to be written neutrally.


 * Sources

Option 5

 * Law & Order : Special Victims Unit
 * Article Evaluation
 * I found that there was some information that is outdated or not relevant to the article, and could be edited to reduce the length and make the work more concise. The article is pretty neutral, and most of the claims had citations. I looked at the citations and noticed most of them were from NBC, which I can understand because of the nature of the article and what claims they were being used to support.
 * I found that there was some information that is outdated or not relevant to the article, and could be edited to reduce the length and make the work more concise. The article is pretty neutral, and most of the claims had citations. I looked at the citations and noticed most of them were from NBC, which I can understand because of the nature of the article and what claims they were being used to support.


 * Sources