User talk:Erikpineda/sandbox

1.) Each fact had a reliable reference so it was reasonable. 2.) In the article, all the information was relevant to the topic. 3.) At one point in the article I believed it was biased but I believe it was because they were trying to explain the topic in such way they had to see the perspective of one’s side. 4.) The information comes from various of articles and outside sources that are neutral and reasonable. They all seem to not take any sides and seem biased towards the topic either. 5.) I believe the viewpoints are just right. They are not to overrepresented or underrepresented.  6.) The links I checked from where the information was from did work so they must be reasonable. There was not any plagiarism that I saw but I believe the facts were paraphrased but done correctly so it was legitimate. 7.) The information given seemed to be all in the correct time period. Everything that could have been possible talked about was their and nothing else could have been missing.

Erikpineda (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2017 (UTC)Erik Pineda Rodriguez