User talk:Campbellmotter/sandbox

We would like to revise the article “Drug Use in Music” by creating an a more research based article through the inclusion of references and scientific studies. This includes four scientific studies we found was necessary to include in the article. Studies done by investigators at the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, researchers in the New York Department of Population Health, researchers across Europe, and a Wikipedia article on electronic dance music and its relation to drugs. By providing the reader with outside research as well as scientific studies, we believe we can bring more awareness to the severity of drug use in relation to music thereby encouraging the audience to take action.

Peer review by Harrison Hornbrook

1. Does each sentence of the proposed edit lead back to a reliable source for a reference or citation? If not, point out which ones do not, and how they need to be fixed.

This group does a good job of making sure all proposed research and information is cited, so yes all information leads back to a reliable source.

2. Is any of the language that the edit uses subjective or not-neutral? For example, "most popular pop singer" is a subjective criteria that is not neutral. However, "winner of 10 Grammy awards", when backed up by a reliable source, is acceptable as it makes use of verifiable information.

All the information is backed up but there are certain instances where nonneutral language is used. specifically when they talk about how music alters preferences. Certain sentences like "This is dangerous to underdeveloped minds" can be seen as subjective but by elaborating on that it example it can be more informative.

3. Does the language contain unsourced opinions and value statements, which are not neutral and should be removed? For example, instead of saying: “She was the best singer,” the text should say: “She had 14 number one hits, more than any other singer.”

The group actually does a really good job of using proper language and keeping their information neutral and does not need to be fixed or updated — Preceding unsigned comment added by HHornbrook (talk • contribs) 18:02, 28 March 2019 (UTC)