User talk:Mohammedmugallid/sandbox

Critiquing articles

During the article evaluation process on Wikipedia, I learned a lot of new things. Firstly, I learned while reading the article that I had to determine if the article was relevant to the actually topic, I also learned to check that all the information is up to date with current science, also to check if there is an information gap in the topic. I also learned to detected biased articles, and sources. The way I approach critiquing the article was to use all of the information above to critique the article. The reason why I decided to evaluate Environmental Hazards was because there was an information gap in the article, and it was not rated high on the Wikipedia score, which meant it needs improvement.

Summarizing your contributions

I believe me adding a whole new topic is beneficial to Wikipedia, because the topic that I choose is a new mining technique which is using Bacteria in the separation of metals which can revolutionize mining in general. Also, there was no information on Wikipedia in regards to my topic.

Peer Review

During the peer review process, I peer reviewed two articles, I recommended changes to their articles based on their structure, sources, content, and flow. My peers did not recommend any changes due to the fact that I was not peer reviewed.

Feedback

I did not receive any feedback from other Wikipedia editors, if I would have gotten feedback I would accept the feedback where appropriate and make the necessary changes, due to the fact that most likely the Wikipedia editors are more experienced in writing articles on Wikipedia compared to me.

Wikipedia Generally

Before this assignment I used to think that there were no guidelines/rules in Wikipedia for when writing an article, however that has completely changed now since I know the process an article goes through and strict rules that must be followed. The Wikipedia assignment is different from other assignment, because you have training exercises, and the work that you do will most likely been seen by people compared to normal assignments where the professor or teaching assistance only see your work. Wikipedia can be used to improve topics, because almost anyone with credible sources and knowledge can add to a topic compared to peer reviewed articles which is very difficult to get published, also using Wikipedia is faster in regards to publishing your work compared to peer reviewed articles, also Wikipedia is great because its public and totally free to be used worldwide.