User talk:Liam Day213/sandbox

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
Student's article is listed as being Percival, but I'm assuming these edits are intended for the Parzival article instead. The content is pertinent to understanding the role of Feirefiz, Parzival's half brother, in the literary piece. The new content proposed by the student resembles another section in the wiki article, "Women in Parzival." While I think this is already intended, the proposed content should be added under its own section heading, like the aforementioned example.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
The article is not neutral in that it presents three distinct analyses of Fierfiz's character. Given that an analysis is intended to prove something about a character, the content cannot be considered neutral.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
While two of the viewpoints are similar, that pair contrasts with the third viewpoint provided. The content feels generally well-rounded in terms of describing viewpoints & interpretations. However, A bit of expansion on Harms's viewpoint would add some clarity and would distinguish Harms's points from Caples.

Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
The link provided does work, though it still needs to be properly formatted. The linked document is the direct source of the information in the student's article. One suggestion, when quoting a line from Parzival, try to attach a citation for a specific translation, since different translators will have slight variances.

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 content primarily cites one source. Given that the content is presenting the 3 aforementioned viewpoints, this may be comprehensive enough for the addition. A mention of possible bias would be useful, if possible. Given that it is an essay on the role of Feirefiz in Parzival, I cannot conclusively say if the source is neutral.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added?
Based on the info available on JSTOR, the source seems to be from 1975 or around then. Since this is a few decades old, it would be beneficial to supplement the proposed content with another source on a similar topic that is more recently published, if possible. This is especially relevant given Feirefiz's mixed racial ancestry, as scholarly research & general public consciousness of racial issues has changed significantly since '75.

Mpohlman2000 (talk) 01:10, 26 November 2018 (UTC)