User talk:Jaylansteele/sandbox

Article Evaluation Radical Criminology

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? There isn't anything that I found that was relevant or distracting to me.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? I did not see anything that was out of date, but there is a lot of information that has not been done on this topic.

What else could be improved? This article can be improved by collecting more data.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There is only basic information about the topic, there is nothing that is bias.

Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented? Again, there is not a lot of information on the topic.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The links do work in this article, also the sources do support the claims in this 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? There are no biases in the article. The references that they provided are reliable.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There is no conversation in this article.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article was rated as stub and low. This article is within the Wikiproject Crime.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There is only a couple of facts on the topic, and there has not been a lot of research on the topic.