User talk:Jessica Cragun/sandbox

Educational psychology article

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? '''Nothing distracted me, I feel that the material was clear and concise. Everything put in this article was related to the original topic.''' Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article does not have any blaring biases, information was factual and, there could have been more depth to it but overall the subheadings and paragraphs were strong. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I feel that they spent a lot of time on famous psychologist and not enough time on the basics of what educational psychology. Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes the links work, they do support the article. Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? Yes the facts are supported, there were no biased sources. Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? No information out of date.

Suggestibility
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Yes everything was relevant, there just needs to be more depth. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I feel that this article was not biased or have any overpowering ideas. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There is an underrepresentation on the definition and some minor things missing in the other sections. Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Citations work, there are not enough sources though. Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? '''The sources are all reliable and they make sense with the topic. There just need to be more.''' Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? The information was up to date, there are just not enough articles and sources, this article lacks depth.

Virtual Reality
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? This article was great at staying on point and the topics were interesting to read. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? '''As far as I could tell this was a neutral article, I do not know much about virtual reality. I am not a great person to ask questions about this topic.''' Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The privacy section needs more depth or to just be deleted altogether. Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Is each fact supported by an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? '''There seems to be no problem with the citations, there are lots of them. This is a very well researched article.''' Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? A few of the articles are in the older range but even the older articles contribute a lot the other article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessica Cragun (talk • contribs) 16:44, 18 October 2019 (UTC)