User:V maricela/sandbox

Evaluating Articles and Sources
1. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? The article racial identity is missing some content and needs more information. Is there anything that distracted you? Yes, I find the term "racial passing" distracting because it is being use in a odd way. 2. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I find the article hard to follow because it does not describe racial identity.

3. Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented? I found some points over represented which confuse me what the person is talking about.

4. Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes, the article provided some sources that relate to the claim; also, the links that were provided worked.

5. Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Yes and no. Where does the information come from? It was hard to tell because they provided popular cultural, film, music, and television as sources. Are these neutral sources? Yes and no. If biased, is that bias noted?

6. Is any information out of date? No. Is anything missing that could be added? I think racial identity could have been explained little better.

7. 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? In the talk page I found other wikipedians agreeing me. Another wikipedian mentioned it lacks information.

8. How is the article rated? The article is rated as a c-class which it could be missing content or require substantial clean up. Is it a part of any WikiProjects? No.

9. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? As I was going through the Wikipedia tutorial, I learn we need to avoid language problem which needs some work in this article.