User talk:Cchilds2/sandbox

Article Evaluation for Wikipedia page, "Encyclopédie":

Everything in the article is directly relevant to the Encyclopedie, however, the article could be better organized. There are certain sections (such as the Science and Technology aspect of the Encyclopedie) that seem bare and need to be furnished with further information. There are certain facts that are provided which should be elaborated on, such as the last sentence of the Contributors section which cites: "Due to the controversial nature of some of the articles, several of its editors went to jail.[23]" Either further information should be listed within this section or another section the reader can be directed to.

The article comes across as neutral, however, it does focus heavily on the positive ideas that the Encyclopedie helped spread and fails to mention some of negative aspects, such as the spread of misinformation and certain biased opinions and theories presented by its contributors. There should be more information about the population who purchased the Encyclopedie, how they obtained them, and how the subscription system worked.

The sources seem to come from a varied pool, most of which are reputable and neutral. There are enough sources for the information that is provided and everything is covered with a citation. The citation links work and support the claims presented within the article.

The Talk page of the article covers a variety of issues. Users are concerned about the legitimacy of specific sources, the neutrality of presented views, and translation efforts. The Article is part of many Wikiprojects, such as WikiProject France and WikiProject Books.

The Encyclopedie article covers the topic quite similarly to how it is presented in our textbook: a revolutionary, controversial project that helped disseminate revolutionary ideas to a small portion of the European population. Cchilds2 (talk) 23:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)