User talk:Katieriles32/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Article: Dirty Hands

This article stays on topic the whole time and the information is all relevant. However, there is certainly a lot of room to add more. The article only touches on the main idea of the dirty hands problem and doesn't get into the meat of Martin Hollis' argument. In fact, the article doesn't even mention Hollis. I don't notice any biases in the article, other that the fact that the philosophers who were quoted were few and select. I think it would be helpful if the article mentioned more examples of the dirty hands problem and explained them more thoroughly because I think this article isn't sufficient enough to explain to someone who hasn't previously read about the dirty hands problem what it is all about. I also think it would be good to add a description of the difference between good vs. bad and right vs. wrong and how that relates to the dirty hands problem. Another problem I noticed is that the article says "The term itself comes from Jean-Paul Sartre's 1948 play Dirty Hands," which is not entirely true. The specific phrase "dirty hands" may have first been used there, but the concept of it can be seen in Shakespeare's Macbeth and even going back to the Bible. This article differs from how we have discussed the dirty hands problem in class as it does not focus Martin Hollis' view on the problem and instead focuses on Michael Walzer and Bernard Williams. The sources used and cited in the article are reliable and reasonably unbiased. There are also no comments on the talk page. This article is rated as Stub-Class, meaning it is not long enough or contain enough information to be considered a valid encyclopedia entry.

Katieriles32 (talk) 07:08, 16 February 2018 (UTC)