User:VictoriaNorth91/sandbox

User:VictoriaNorth91/sandbox/user

Determining to write a new article or select a preexisting article:
After both heavily reviewing articles and spending a lot of time on one in particular (Effects of Stress on Memory), we determined that we would be best suited to editing and contributing to an existing article.

Article Review
While several articles were reviewed, spending most of our time looking through 'B-Class' and 'C-Class' level articles in the psychology section, we decided to stick with the aforementioned article. We felt that together, we could make the biggest impact by giving this article its best chance to make it to an 'A-Class' article.

Option 1
Article title


 * The Effects of Stress on Memory
 * Article Evaluation
 * While the article is very informative, it is unorganized and too technical for the average reader to follow. The article needs a lot of background information added and information currently present needs broken down further so readers can understand what is being discussed. The talk page is relatively active, though does show a low interaction rate with the article and citations are relatively up-to-date and all links do work properly.
 * While the article is very informative, it is unorganized and too technical for the average reader to follow. The article needs a lot of background information added and information currently present needs broken down further so readers can understand what is being discussed. The talk page is relatively active, though does show a low interaction rate with the article and citations are relatively up-to-date and all links do work properly.


 * Sources
 * Thomas, A. K., & Karanian, J. M. (2019). Acute stress, memory, and the brain. Brain and Cognition, 133, 1–4. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uvu.edu/10.1016/j.bandc.2019.04.004
 * Ricker, A. A., Corley, R., DeFries, J. C., Wadsworth, S. J., & Reynolds, C. A. (2018). Examining the Influence of Perceived Stress on Developmental Change in Memory and Perceptual Speed for Adopted and Nonadopted Individuals. Developmental Psychology, 54(1), 138–150. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uvu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ1165312&site=eds-live
 * Smith, A. M., Davis, F. C., & Thomas, A. K. (2018). Criterial learning is not enough: Retrieval practice is necessary for improving post-stress memory accessibility. Behavioral Neuroscience, 132(3), 161–170. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uvu.edu/10.1037/bne0000240
 * Goldfarb, E. V., Tompary, A., Davachi, L., & Phelps, E. A. (2019). Acute stress throughout the memory cycle: Diverging effects on associative and item memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(1), 13–29. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uvu.edu/10.1037/xge0000472.supp (Supplemental)

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Emotion and Memory
 * Article Evaluation
 * While it is a well written article, many of it's citations are out of date, most ranging from over 20-30 years old. This article needs heavily updated. Not only that, but the Talk page is relatively empty, showing little interaction with the article itself.
 * While it is a well written article, many of it's citations are out of date, most ranging from over 20-30 years old. This article needs heavily updated. Not only that, but the Talk page is relatively empty, showing little interaction with the article itself.


 * Sources

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Episodic Memory


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article is largely disorganized and listed as a 'b-class' level article. Though it does have a very active talk page,several errors and falsehoods have already been pointed out, showing that this article is relatively problematic.


 * Sources

Option 4

 * Article title


 * Mood-Dependent Memory

Article Evaluation"Not only does this article seem to have conflicting writing styles, but it has a massively inactive talk page and only one picture that has little to do with the context of the article. References and citations are incredibly lacking, with only seven total citations, all of which are over 10 years old, with the most recent being 2003. There are walls of text with no citation whatsoever, leading one to believe that all listed information is either taken from the author themselves, or plagiarized, both of which are problematic."Sources

Lead
Guiding questions:


 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

The information is pertinent to the field of Cognitive Psychology. ''Throughout the course, we will be discussing long- and short-term memory. In addition to that, as college students, we all experience stress to varying levels depending on the courses we are taking as well as what is happening in our lives. These differing stress levels can have an effect on how we retain memories.''


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

No. This article is lacking a well developed introduction and currently the author has left the article untitled because there is a question regarding whether or not there should be a space between the words ‘stress’ and ‘memory’ in the title. There is never a space between words in a title. There is no clear break down of the information that is presented in the body of the article and the introduction is overly technical in and of itself.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

It does not. I jumps right into highly technical information without preparing the reader in advance for how the information in the article is to be presented.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

It does not. The Lead is lacking in information. It would help this article if it’s author would post a Lead/introduction that would prepare a reader for how the information is grouped.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

There is not enough of a Lead to evaluate. What is present is overly technical and at times hard to follow as it seems to be missing links and jumps from point to point.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

The content of the article is all relevant to the title, but I thought some of it was overly technical and at times very difficult to follow. A possible solution to this would be to add links to words like, “intrinsic” and “extrinsic” because I didn’t understand their use in regards to stress and memory. The author has attempted to link definitions to these terms, but too late in the article and after the reader is confused about their purpose. One thing that helps sort through all of the technical talk is the photos and diagrams.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

Yes, the vast majority of sources cited were less than ten years old. Sources older than that were important enough to justify their use.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

No. The author covered the topic well with a variety of good sources. There is no content that does not belong, as all of the information presented is important to the topic. The sources support the claims in the article. Each fact references a reliable source but one, and someone has already left a note for the author to fix that. However, there are periods throughout the article where better descriptions would be helpful to the layman reader or to help clarify difficult subjects related to the mater.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article neutral?

Yes. In reading the article a reader would not be able to tell of it’s author feels a certain way in regards to its content.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No, there is a great deal of evidence presented that stress does affect memory.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

No. But because there is no introduction and some of the information that is presented initially leaves the reader wondering why it is there.


 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

The context of the article does support that stress leads to memory problems. There is no evidence presented that leads the reader to believe otherwise.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

No. The article only cites primary sources of information.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?

Yes. Most sources are less than ten years old. Sources that are older are justified in their use because they are important to the topic.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Yes. All checked sources work.

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

The article is not well-written because because there is not a well-developed introduction telling the reader how the information is to be presented.


 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

The article is free of spelling and grammatical errors.


 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

No. This is what is missing in the article. There was no introduction so the reader is left confused about why certain sections are being presented.

Images and Media
Guiding questions:


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

Yes. Because the article is written in such a technical manner the images are necessary for the reader to understand the content.


 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

Yes. All images are public domain images and are therefore available to use without copyright infringement.


 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Yes. They are basic enough to understand. They also support the material.

Checking the talk page
Guiding questions:


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

Other evaluations have stated that the article it overly technical and is missing an introduction. There are mentions of contradictory information in the opening of the article and the strong need for clarity.


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

The article is in the Talk Phase and therefore does not yet have a quality rating. It is part of a few different WikiProjects including WikiProject Physiology	(Rated B-class, Mid-importance), WikiProject Psychology (Rated B-class, High-importance), and WikiProject Neuroscience	(Rated B-class, Mid-importance).


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

We’ve not yet covered this in class.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * What is the article's overall status?

The article is in the Talk Phase.


 * What are the article's strengths?

It's an interesting topic. Stress and memory issues likely affect all people which make the article relevant. I appreciate the diagrams and photos. They are necessary given how technically advances the article is.


 * How can the article be improved?

It needs to be organized and needs an introduction that introduces the reader to the topic as well as how the article is presented. It is lacking in clarity that drastically needs improved upon.


 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Although the information presented is thoroughly covered but the article lacks the organization that is required for the reader to understand why certain information is being presented.

Overall evaluation


 * Learning how to use formatting (bold, italics, underline).
 * Learning how to LINK as well as how to link directly to another wiki page (bold typography vs. boldness)
 * Learning how to use wiki citations Paragraph: Set the style of your text. For example, make a header or plain paragraph text. You can also use it to offset block quotes.
 * Accepted an invitation to partake in the Teahouse where questions can be asked by new users and answered by experienced reviewers, editors, and wiki-writers.
 * INDIVIDUAL TRAINING COMPLETED SUNDAY SEPTEMBER 1st!

A : Highlight your text, then click here to format it with bold]], italics, etc. The “More” options allows you to underline (U ), cross-out text (S), add code snippets ( { } ), change language keyboards (Aあ), and clear all formatting ( ⃠ ).

Links: Highlight text and push this button to make it a link. The Visual Editor will automatically suggest related Wikipedia articles for that word or phrase. This is a great way to connect your article to more Wikipedia content. You only have to link important words once, usually during the first time they appear. If you want to link to pages outside of Wikipedia (for an “external links” section, for example) click on the “External link” tab.

Cite: The citation tool in the Visual Editor helps format your citations. You can simply paste a DOI or URL, and the Visual Editor will try to sort out all of the fields you need. Be sure to review it, however, and apply missing fields manually (if you know them). You can also add books, journals, news, and websites manually. That opens up a quick guide for inputting your citations. Once you've added a source, you can click the “re-use” tab to cite it again.

Bullets: To add bullet points or a numbered list, click here.

Insert: This tab lets you add media, images, or tables.

Ω: This tab allows you to add special characters, such as those found in non-English words, scientific notation, and a handful of language extensions.