User:Yvette Dana/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Cardiff Giant
 * The lead section is extremely short with little detail. The are many citations though there are some citations that are missing. Also, there should have been more peer-reviewed work. The sections are split in a very organized way and the content is relevant to the topic. It does not cover one of Wikipedia's equity gaps.
 * Sources
 * https://www.farmersmuseum.org/cardiff-giant/
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20050212173955/http
 * https://www.farmersmuseum.org/cardiff-giant/
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20050212173955/http

Option 2

 * Indigenous peoples of the Americas
 * The lead was extremely detailed. The sections were split up in an organized way with relevant content. There are a lot of good images with detailed captions. There are many reliable sources though some were outdated and old.
 * Sources
 * https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofno00hoxi/page/568/mode/2up
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1378010/
 * https://archive.org/details/encyclopediaofno00hoxi/page/568/mode/2up
 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1378010/

Option 3

 * Piltdown Man
 * The lead section is very detailed though it is a bit long. The sections are split up very nicely with relevant content. The article is against Dawson and persuades the readers that he was the primary perpetrator of the Piltdown Hoax by providing evidence to support his claim. There appears to be a mix of sources such as many peer reviewed ones and some news articles. The article provides many appealing images about the topic in each section. However, some of the images could have had a better caption with more details.
 * Sources
 * https://www2.clarku.edu/faculty/djoyce/piltdown/map_report_finds/pilt_man_discover.html
 * https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/piltdown_man_01.shtml
 * https://www2.clarku.edu/faculty/djoyce/piltdown/map_report_finds/pilt_man_discover.html
 * https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/archaeology/piltdown_man_01.shtml

Option 4

 * Giant penguin hoax
 * The lead is extremely short with little detail. The article itself has clear sections with relevant content though it is not detailed enough. There are not enough peer-reviewed sources. There were no images which could have greatly enhanced the article.
 * Sources
 * http://members.tripod.com/~UNX3/crypto.html
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20071125193117/http://www.csicop.org/si/2002-03/bigfoot.html
 * http://members.tripod.com/~UNX3/crypto.html
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20071125193117/http://www.csicop.org/si/2002-03/bigfoot.html

Option 5

 * Pseudoscience
 * The lead is not brief enough. Considering that the article is extremely detailed, there are not enough images. The sections are split up very nicely with relevant content. There are many sources that are all reliable and each claim has a citation. There are many peer-reviewed articles.
 * Sources
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20090425202814/http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/pseudo/scipseud.htm
 * https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20090425202814/http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/pseudo/scipseud.htm
 * https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/