User:Valderrama097/sandbox

=  Article Evaluation  = Evaluate article content by answering the following questions:


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?


 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * What else could be improved?

This article seems very well step up. Everything is organized, has citations, and dates connected to citations. I feel like the only information that could be added is new research on the New Black Panther Party. Great catch! Kdavis25 (talk) 23:25, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Evaluate the article's tone by answering the following questions:


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

It's very straight to the point and neutral. Each section has their little bit of information and it's made obvious that every point is being talked about.

Evaluating the article's sources by answering the following questions:


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * 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?

Amazing citations one of them actually took me to an interview about a mans experience in a health clinic that was an aid for the African American Community. Oooo, cool! Kdavis25 (talk) 23:25, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Now take a look at how others are talking about this article on the talk page.

 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

This that were mentioned was how a source citation wasn't supporting a topic and it gave detail on why and additional research. There's also removal of information and the editor asking to review it and offering help as well.