User:Abbymoniquee/sandbox
This is a user sandbox of Abbymoniquee. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the sandbox where you should draft your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. To find the right sandbox for your assignment, visit your Dashboard course page and follow the Sandbox Draft link for your assigned article in the My Articles section. |
95% Good work! (+=correct, ++=extra credit -=incorrect ~=half credit)
My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Spring 2017
My Research Topic is: The Origins of Piano
Key words related to my Research Topic are: Piano
Part 1:
Examine Wikipedia articles that are directly related to your Research Topic and select a substantive article to evaluate. This could be an article about an idea (e.g., I might choose the one about Trance) or a person (if I were researching Reggae music, I might pick Bob Marley). Answer the following questions:
++I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)
Piano https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Piano
+1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? No
If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.
Write an brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter?
-Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warning that is in that banner.
+2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? Yes it is easy to understand. It summarizes exactly what the instrument is and how it is played.
+3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and foonotes at the end?” Yes it is clear.
+4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? Yes
+5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? Yes it states facts not opinions.
+6. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc. The references are reliable. Theres hardly any footnotes.
7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:
+a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English?
Yes.
+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”?
Its all pretty neutral.
+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?
Yes it does.
+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?
No it had so much information on this topic, nothing was left out.
+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?
Some are longer than others, yes.
+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?
It lacks footnotes.
+g. Look at the “View History” for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors?
I don't see any hostile dialogue or anything disrespectful.
__________________________
Part 2:
Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:
+Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History) April 19, 2017
~Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) They have good amount of references. And lost of other sources that people can check out for more information. +Relevance (to your research topic) This information on this article was very relevant. It informed me plenty on so much about the Piano. +Depth Its pretty in depth, I knew what they were talking about. +Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) I think this article can be read by a general audience. Anyone in high school and above. +Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) I think the purpose/object of creating this article was to teach me about the piano and help me understand where it came from and all its pieces and relatives. I also think this article could move someone to want to play the piano.