User talk:147.26.251.150/sandbox

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? For the most part, each fact ends with a reference. The question now is to discover if each reference is actually reliable or just random unnecessary information. •Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything seems to flow very well in the article and seems to have some kind of relevance. •Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I believe the article is more on the neutral side because it doesn't have a different viewpoint present. All the article states is what collaborative leadership is, the history and the characteristics. •Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? The sources on the article come from Harvard Business Review which I believe these are pretty neutral. The other five sources listed seem that they can be reliable, but I just have to make sure they are later on. •If biased, is that bias noted? Not biased at all. •Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The viewpoint that might be a little underrepresented is the point of example. It is clearly represented under characteristics and definition, but an example of collaborative leadership might be a good point to add into the Wikipedia page itself. •Check a few citations. Do the links work? Almost all the links ended up working except for the red ones. •Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? None. •Is any information out of date? All the information seems to be up to date but my group will be more in depth in the information once we actually start our research. •Is anything missing that could be added? We will find out once our group starts more researching on this topic. I'm hoping we can make this article more longer and filled with more information.