User talk:Nia Dokes/sandbox

Article Evaluation My observations and learnings about the article evaluations was that you have to properly cite your sources or they will become deleted by an editor. When making a foot note you must type in to close the foot note and then hit the edit and save button and type in your for editing the page. Also when taking information from another site changing the words within the paragraph is still plagiarism. You must take information from different sources and then summarize the information that you found on your topic into your own words. You must pick information from a reliable source and not from social media or blogs.

1.)Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything in the article is relevant to the topic and the thing that distracted me in the article was that during the riots in South Central L.A there were a total of sixty-three people killed because of situation was getting out of control. 2.)Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article is very neutral it touches on every aspect of what occurred during the 1992 Los Angeles riots and giving specfic reasons of why the riots happened and what was the solution. 3.)Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The only viewpoints that I feel that are underrepresented would be the viewpoints of the victims who were injured during the riots of L.A. Another view point that was not represented was that both the Latino and Asian communities who were involved in the riots. 4.)Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The citations do work and the links work as well. The source does support the claims in the article where the information comes from a reliable source. 5.)Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?  Each fact is referenced with an appropriate reliable reference. The information comes from US News and the sources are neutral giving more of an explanation to what happened during the riots and to the victims of the riots aswell. 6.)Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? The information is up to date and the article covers a what actually occurred during the outbreak and the views of the victims. 7.)Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?  The conversations that are going on behind the scenes of this article is that the jury consisted of ten white men, a Latino and a Asian person, the jury did not have a black person. The person who was being persecuted was a black man. Also, how the article barely mentions racism in terms of the events that led up to the riots and how certain ethnic groups were being targeted during the riots. 8.)How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article was rated as Start-Class and was supported by the L.A. Task force. Also, the only project that this article was apart of was the Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. 9.) How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The way wikipedia discusses the topic differs from the way it is discussed in class by the article including a lot of detail about the riots and who were specifically targeted and what was the solution to the outcome of the riots.Nia Dokes (talk) 18:57, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Mychelle's Peer Review
Your points are very well detailed, however, I'm slightly confused at the end of the first paragraph that ended with a question mark. The grammar is okay; minor errors with a few grammar errors. Very good ideas and thoughts on what to add to the contribution of the page. I think you should definitely add more statistics in your paragraphs when referring to "most" or "some" girls to give the audience more insight and background on exactly what age/groups you're referring to. The breakdown of the country by country is definitely informative and is essential when comparing data. Your article addition is fresh and has a lot of information to shed on the article. (Mychelles (talk) 04:18, 3 November 2017 (UTC))

I like how you added a lot of key information to an interesting topic/article. There are a few grammar errors, but other than that you did well contributing to the article. Jordanspen (talk) 02:50, 8 November 2017 (UTC)