User talk:Natelp/sandbox

Hi my name is Nate Pines and I am a student in your Anthropology 467 class!

Article Evaluation
The article I chose to evaluate and review is called New World vulture. Everything, for the most part, in the article is relevant to the article topic however, there was one part that distracted me where it talked about old world vultures. Other than talking about old world vultures for a brief moment everything else was relevant to the article topic. The article talked about the species of new world vultures, their history and ancestry, the extinct new world vultures, their habitats, build, and even their importance in culture. The article is completely neutral, the article simply states facts about the new world vultures. However, I guess there is one part that could be considered biased against the king vulture. The article states that the "king vulture is stated as least concern", this could be viewed as biased and one may have another viewpoint that views the king vulture as the new world vulture species that deserves the most protection. This is not necessarily a viewpoint so there are no view points that are overrepresented or underrepresented but I think that there should be more information on the status and conservation section of the new world vultures. This is the most important section of the article, in my opinion, so there should be more information on the conservation and status of the new world vultures because keeping them from becoming extinct is of the utmost priority. This section is underrepresented even though it is not necessarily a viewpoint but a fact. The links that I checked worked and the sources do support the claims and facts presented in the article. Each fact is referred with an appropriate reliable reference. Most of the information comes from the American Ornithologists' Union, BirdLife International, and other reliable independent sources. Most of the sources that the information comes from are neutral due to the fact that they are simply stating facts. However, I guess BirdLife International and American Ornithologists' Union could be considered biased towards the protection and conservation of birds because this is what they personally believe in. This biased is not stated as well. The status of the populations of the new world vultures species and the taxonomy section is out of date, these numerical values could be updated to a more recent statistic. Also, the IUCN Red List is out of date in the article and could use some updating on which vultures are of least concern and most concern. The only information missing is the information about the poaching and poisoning of the vultures, this information is necessary to understanding why some of the vulture species are becoming endangered. Also, some other missing information is the vulture's importance/ value in African culture and the black market. In the talks page there is a discussion about how new world vultures are more related to old world vultures than storks and how they are also very different from condors. The talk page also includes comments about needed expansion of information on multiple sections, clarification of words in relation to meaning, and even a discussion about the name change of the new world vultures. This article received a good article nomination however it failed the GA review due to the short lead and choppy prose. This article is not apart of any WikiProjects. The way Wikipedia talks about the new world vultures is different from the way that we talked about them in class. Wikipedia goes more in depth into the build, species' names, extinct species, and the bacteria in the gut of the new world vultures. In class we talked about many of the same things present in the Wikipedia article however we mostly just talked about the conservation of the vultures and why they are so important while the Wikipedia article talked about many other things related to the new world vultures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Natelp (talk • contribs) 00:47, 15 February 2018 (UTC)