User:XicanaXilonen/sandbox

Examine Wikipedia articles that are directly related to your Research Topic and select a substantive article to evaluate. This could be an article about an idea (e.g., I might choose the one about Trance) or a person (if I were researching Reggae music, I might pick Bob Marley). Answer the following questions:

I do not know XicanaXilonen is in real life. Please let me know so that I can put the grade in the right place.
I chose to read and evaluate the article titled:

96 % + = full credit | = half credit - = zero credit

= ++ Homosexuality and religion = (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)

Use the criteria from the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure to evaluate the article. (Get your copy from the Reference Desk.)

+ 1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? No

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

Write an brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter?

Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warning that is in that banner.

+ 2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? yes it is easy to understand and summarizes the key points.

+ 3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and foonotes at the end?” Yes it is broken down by religions.

+ 4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? Yes and no it gives different views depending on the religion and the religion's back round.

+ 5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? it provides reads and teaching from the specific religion kind of an informational article. But it is a bit bias towards homosexuality being seen as a positive thing rather than a negative one.

+ 6. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc. Yes the are scholarly sources published from universities.

7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

+ a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English? yes a bit bias though.

+ b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? "Among those denominations that generally are negative towards these orientations, there are many different types of actions they may take: this can range from quietly discouraging homosexual activity, explicitly forbidding same-sex sexual practices among adherents and actively opposing social acceptance of homosexuality, to execution. Religious fundamentalism has been found to correlate positively with anti-homosexual bias.[1] Many argue that it is homosexual actions which are sinful, rather than the state of being homosexual itself. To this end, some discourage labeling individuals according to sexual orientation.[2] Several organizations exist that assert that conversion therapy can help diminish same-sex attraction.

However, some adherents of many religions view the two sexual orientations positively, and some religious denominations may blesssame-sex marriages and support LGBT rights, and the amount of those that do are continuously increasing around the world as much of the developed world enacts laws supporting LGBT rights." this sounded a bit bias to me however I am not sure

+ c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? no it refers back a lot to churches and studies done in universities

+ d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? Yes it talks about how homosexuality plays a role in every religion.

+ e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? Yes, some of the religions have a larger description.

+ f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? No

+ g. Look at the “View History” for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors? No only corrections made.

__________________________

Part 2:

Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:

+ Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History) January 26,2016

+ Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) I could not find authors

+ Relevance (to your research topic) very relevent

+Depth bias approach

| Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) blog-ish

+ Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) To inform but gives a bias approach.