User talk:Lptoled2/sandbox

Article Evaluation: LGBT Parenting

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

A minor things were not mentioned that I have encountered into my intro to LGBTQ studies. The language being used within the article was quite a distraction because a lot of new language has been created.

Is any information out of date?

The title of the article should not be LGBT, instead it should include all forms of the community; LGTBQIA2S+

What else could be improved?

The homophobia and Transphobia does not mention what that refers too nor does it relate on how it affects the families.

Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented?

As I evaluated this article, it was a bit underrepresented because of the language, not many sources of evidence of the facts, and how non traditional families are important in today's society.

.How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Lesbian and queer cultures is a significant reason why people should educated themselves within society. The things that are mentioned in the article and what we discuss about in class differ because we call people in for the use of language that individuals are accustomed too.

Peer Review Leslie Toledo
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything was an easy guide to read through. There was a comma after the "or" part which can be deleted. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article appears to be informative and gave clarification. It seems as though the edit was fixing grammatical errors in the section.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I feel as though it is underrepresented because it did not give a lot of insight of queering the section.

Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Citations were good. Active and links and does relate back to the topic. 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. It relates back to different ISBN's provided. The information comes from reliable sources. There are neutral sources and no bias notes.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that should be added? The information was edited, therefore, I do recommend more queering — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lptoled2 (talk • contribs) 03:16, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Maud's Peer review response
Thank you Maud for your suggestions. I appreciate your input and insight on the sections of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lptoled2 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 4 December 2018 (UTC)