User talk:Elysegleeson/sandbox

Article Evaluation Nicole Hahn Rafter

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? The article itself is very thorough and totally discussed the works of Rafter.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? Some of the earlier publications referenced in the page are from 1969. I think these are probably out of date. However the article does reference many more current pieces as well.

What else could be improved? While it is evident it is talking about the concept of biocriminology, it never directly uses that term.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Article is based almost exclusively on fact and studies done by accredited professionals

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The author asserts that Rafter played a role in

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes.

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? Not Bias at all, all statements are matter of fact and supported by statistical facts.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Asked to submit external links. External links were added.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Wikiproject Crime and Wikiproject Feminism

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Unobjective.