User talk:Mrsdooley/sandbox

I like that you've stated very clearly which criteria you were going to evaluate the articles on. Also, your notes on bias are very interesting -- I think that most of the time, government documents would have been judged as absolutely authoritative. However, you make a good point: On a topic such as this one, they may not provide a balanced view.

I was curious, so I ended up looking for Marc Laurendeau; you're right, he is somewhat difficult to track down, especially for an alglophone. However, his Wikipedia page links to this page at the University of Montreal, which may be a little more trustworthy. (The information is still in French, however.) - Onedayinmay (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

You made excellent note of the positive and negative features of both articles, and it is very good to note the bias that can be present in the sources used by contributors. I find it ironic that the most information you could find for the author of the Canadian Encyclopedia's article was on Wikipedia! The vandalism that is recorded definitely does create distrust for the material, but I think that the fact that this was recorded and dealt with also provides some additional credibility. You have provided a very thorough analysis of both articles and the necessity of information literacy, good job! The1tech (talk) 04:23, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed feedback, reviewers! Libringreen (talk) 01:14, 4 December 2012 (UTC)