User talk:Randye63/sandbox

( PERSONALITY ARTICLE ) A clear structure Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? YES, I THINK THAT HAVING THE DEFINITION IN A MORE ORGANIZED ORDER, IS WHAT WILL HELP VIEWERS AND PARTICIPANTS UNDERSTAND BETTER. ALTHOUGH, THEY DO HAVE THE MAIN CONCEPTS, I FOUND THAT patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving. The study of personality focuses on two broad areas: One is understanding individual differences in particular personality characteristics, such as sociability or irritability. The other is understanding how the various parts of a person come together as a whole.

THE BALANCING ACT Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?

YES, WITH IN, THE FIRST PARAGRAPH, THE ARTICLE MENTIONED “While there is no generally agreed upon definition of personality” I FEEL THIS COULD'VE BEEN LEFT OUT Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing? NO ALL ARE INCLUDED Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? NO ITS DOESNT, IT ENDS WITH A CLEAR CONCLUSION

Neutral content Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? YES, BECAUSE IT STATES IN THE BEGINNING “ PERSONALITY” Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y." WHILE I DIDNT FIND ANY OF THE EXAMPLE PHRASES, I DID HOWEVER DISCOVER, THIS FROM THE FIRST PARAGRAPH “Nevertheless, most theories view personality as relatively stable” Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." NO Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic. I DONT THINK SO, HOWEVER BOTH PROS AND CONS BECAME EQUALITY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND

Reliable sources Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? THERE ARE MANY RELIABLE SOURCES BOTH BEING ACADMIC JOURNALS, AND SCHOLAR ARTICLES. Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view. I THINK THIS ARTICLE WAS WELL PORTIONED OUT. Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!

( MOTIVATED REASONING ARTICLE ) A clear structure Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? I THINK THAT IT DOES A GREAT JOB AT FOCUSING ON THE PROCESS ASPECT AND GIVING IT SOME BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HOW REASONING WITH MOTIVATION IS IRRELEVANT TO US HUMANS AND ANIMALS

THE BALANCING ACT Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic? NO, THE ARTICLE DOES A GREAT JOB AT MAKING THE POINTS CLEAR FROM THE START.

Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing? YES, ALL POINTS ARE MADE CLEAR AND ELABORATED UPON

Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? NO

Neutral content Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? YES, AND IT HELPED THAT THE AUTHOR PROVIDED MORE UNDERSTANDABLE THINGS OTHER THAN THE BASES OF INFORMATION Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y." THERE IS NOT Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." THERE IS NOT

Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic. IT MOSTLY FOCUSES ON THE POSTIVES.

Reliable sources Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? THERE ARE MANY RELIABLE SOURCES BOTH BEING ACADMIC JOURNALS, AND SCHOLAR ARTICLES. Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view. I THINK THIS ARTICLE WAS WELL PORTIONED OUT. Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately! NO

(ATTENTION ARTICLE ) A clear structure Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? WELL, I FEEL LIKE IT IS STRUCTURED APPROPRIATE, HOWEVER, I DO FEEL, LIKE IF THEY PLAN TOO ELABORATE ABOUT ATTENTION THEY SHOULD INCLUDED OTHER CONCEPTS WITHIN THIS CATEGORY SO IT DOESN'T SOUND SO BIAS.

THE BALANCING ACT Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic? NO I THNK EVERYTHING WAS ALREADY MENTIONED FROM THE START OF WHAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT TO THIS TOPIC. Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? NO Neutral content Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? YES, AND IT HELPED THAT THE AUTHOR PROVIDED MORE UNDERSTANDABLE THINGS OTHER THAN THE BASES OF INFORMATION Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y." THERE IS NOT Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." THERE IS NOT Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic. IT MOSTLY FOCUSES ON THE POSTIVES. Reliable sources Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? THERE ARE MANY RELIABLE SOURCES BOTH BEING ACADMIC JOURNALS, AND SCHOLAR ARTICLES. Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view. I THINK THIS ARTICLE WAS WELL PORTIONED OUT. Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately! NO