User:Ye348/sandbox

Article Evaluation

William Milnor Roberts Almost everything in this article seemed relevant to the topic, the article mostly described his career and all the works that he was a part of. if there were any "Distracting" aspects of the article they would be the mention of his nine children. This seems fact seems to be more for character development than for the article itself. The article itself reads in a very unbiased neutral way, most of the article is just information about his career and works so there doesn't seem to be much room for biased. The viewpoints seem a little underrepresented and it seems to have issues with its citations because they are not exactly precise. this shows that some of the information may also be out of date. The article also doesn't seem to have a clear source so the information in the article. so its a little unclear whether or not the source information is biased or not. due to all these issues the article seemed to have a poor rating.

Engineering Economics This article was rather bulky but nearly all of the information was relevant so there were no distracting factors in the article. The article just describes the concepts of engineering economics so there isnt much room to be bias on so there is very little bias in this article. from the citations that were checked most of them worked and seemed to match the claims made in the article. Almost all of the facts had appropriate citations that came from relatively neutral sources. From looking into the sources most of the information seems to be up to date, the article doesn't seem to be part of any wiki project but i would give it a high rating because most of it seems to be properly cited and sourced.

Body of Knowledge The article is rather short and doesn't seem to properly use links, due to the fact that the article wasn't very long there isn't much to say about it, most of the information was relevant to the article, but there wasn't much info to begin with. The views seem to be mostly neutral but the source is a bit unclear, some of the citations didn't really match up with the claims in the article, so the references weren't necessarily viable. Some of the links seemed to be out of date so there is some work that could be added. from the talk page the article is part of the wiki project philosophy and was rated Stub-class on the projects quality scale.

Week 4: Discussion about sources and plagiarism

Blog posts and press releases are typically considered to be unreliable sources due to the fact that they are much too biased, take the most recent gun violence at schools for an example. Many people want more regulation on gun laws in order to keep guns out of the hands of people that shouldn't have them. many people blog and tweet their opinions on the issue, the key word here is opinion because what they write may not be neutral and as a result it may not be factual or correct.

A companies website is typically the worst place to try and find neutral information because a companies agenda most of the time is to make money so that they can stay afloat. Because of this most company websites will be very misleading and contain lies, or they will only write positive things about the company in order to improve their image, so they will never tell the full story.

Some good techniques to use in order to avoid plagiarism and close paraphrasing would be to try to understand the topic you are writing about in depth. Once you have a deep understanding of your topic, you can then phrase information from outside sources in a neutral way that wont violate any copyright or plagiarism rules.