User:Waktf3/sandbox

French Academy of Science addition
From 1795 until 1914, the first world war, the French Academy of Science was the most prevalent organization of French science

I have shifted my focus of the project to the decline of scientific power that the academy experienced after world war 1:

Creation of "decline of the academy" section and additions
Although the Academy still exists today, after World war one, the reputation and status of the Academy was largely questioned. One factor of decline was the development from a meritocracy to gerontocracy, in other words; a shift from people with scientific ability leading the Academy to people who had been there longer leading it. It became known as a sort of “hall of fame” that lost control, real and symbolic, of the professional scientific diversity in France at the time. Another factor was that In the span of five years, 1909 to 1914, funding to science faculties considerably dropped, eventually leading to a financial crisis in France.

addition to history section about a reorganization reform
In 1976, the Academy underwent a large-scale reorganization that increased membership significantly. Under this reorganization, 130 resident members, 160 correspondents, and 80 foreign associates could be elected. A vacancy only opens upon the death of a member, as they serve for life. During elections, half of the vacancies are reserved for people less than 55 years old. This was created as an attempt to encourage younger members to join the academy. The reorganization also divided the academy into 2 divisions. One division covers the applications of mathematics and physical sciences, and the other covers the applications of chemical, natural, biological, and medical sciences.

French Academy of Science Evaluation
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: French Academy of Science
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: A place where many notable figures had backgrounds with, and was one of the earliest academies of science

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead consists of a brief, concise overview
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No not really, the lead only really depicts its history
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * concise and to the point but is missing info from its other sections

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content is relevant.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Not a whole lot of changes being made, but some of the sources are very recent
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The academy today section could use some serious upgrading. it is very short

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yes, no visible bias is detectable
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no, the claims are neutral appearing.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * viewpoints of the medals, awards and prizes section might be a bit overstated
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No the article does not try to persuade

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * 11 notes, 4 references. some gaps between footnotes which could use more
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * as far as I can tell
 * Are the sources current?
 * yes, latest is from 2019
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes, the ones that i clicked worked

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * averagely written, the today section needs to be expanded
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * no obvious mistakes
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes, but more sections in detail could be used

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The images help depict the institute in different perspectives
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes they are
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Did not manage to check. will if this article is chosen
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * external links were modified to be more relevent
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Organizations, France, History of science
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * havent talked about it in class (i dont recall)

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * today section needs updating, severely lacking
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * very unbias and very fact telling.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * as stated before, the today section needs updating majorly
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * it is developed decently well. Some digging could help its status.