User talk:Chardy0104/sandbox

Article Evaluation Stanford prison experiment

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything is relevant to the article, there's nothing overly distracting.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? None of the information is out of date. Things could be added to say some things that could have been brought up by the experiment later.

What else could be improved? It could include things that were not initially included in the report.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? It is neutral because even though the experiment was questionable, it doesn't straightly say that about it.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There aren't any viewpoints that are over or under represented.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The links work and support what the author was trying to claim in the article.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Most facts are supported with a reliable reference. That information comes from different journals or writings that were done about it.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Most conversations are just saying that the experiment was too harshly criticized and that the motivation was wrongly thought about.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It's not rated. It's apart of the Stanford University, psychology, California/San Francisco Bay Area, and Correction and Detention Facilities WikiProjects.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We haven't talked about this topic in class.