User talk:Snyderam22/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Everything in the article appears to be relevant from the article although the "After the 1997 Labour Party Victory" section does not add much to the article.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? All information is up to date and the only thing I would say is missing is some statistics or proof of left realism in the world.

What else could be improved? I would clean up the words used in the article and make it easier to read rather than using difficult terminology throughout the whole article.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Although the topic favors the left idealism, the article remains neutral.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? All viewpoints are represented equally.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? The citations work and the sources support the claims in the article.

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 and most of the information comes from books and articles.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The conversations are about cleaning up information and making things flow.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is start-class.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It goes into much more detail than in class.