User:Bluebikerider/sandbox

96.67 % + = full credit | = half credit - = zero credit

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Winter 2016

My real name is: Christiana Tyler

My Research Topic is: Slavery in relation to Christianity in the South

Key words related to my Research Topic are: slavery, Christianity, chattel slavery, religion

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:

- (what was the title of the article you chose to evaluate?I think it was Slavery, but I'm not sure.) I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)

Use the criteria from the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure to evaluate the article. (Get your copy from the Reference Desk.)

+ 1.      Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? Yes or No

a.     No, there is no warning banner at the top of my article.

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?

a.     Yes, the lead section of the article is easy to understand. It begins with a definition for slavery and goes on to list the different types of slavery and addresses its lasting presence in history all over the world.

+ 3.      Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and footnotes at the end?”

a.     Yes, there are many headings and subheadings for this article, specifically subheadings separating information about the nature and presence of slavery in the continents and countries of the world. There are also many footnotes in the article, especially in the company of numerical figures and facts. The images in this entry correspond to the text it is closest to.

+ 4.      Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?

a.     Most of the headings are balanced well but there are a few subheadings that lack substance and clarification and there are a couple that could have been combined or completely omitted. There are also a couple of subheadings that are very extensive when considering their fellow subheadings. Although these flaws are present in the entry, I would not say that they take too much away from the overall validity of the article; it just makes the entry look a bit odd and slightly less professional than it should. As a reader, I still feel that I get a sufficient overview of the topic.

+ 5.      Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?

a.     Yes, the article provides an unbiased point of view which can be difficult to do on any topic especially one as horrifying as slavery. The article reads as an informative entry, as it should.

+ 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.

a.     The references and footnotes seem to be from reliable sources although many of which are not exactly scholarly. A few references were published by university presses, government sources, but many others were published by popular source like CNN, BBC News, and the New York Times. There were also other sources like Encyclopedia Britannica.

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?

       i. The lead section is written in correct English.

+ b.      are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”?

i.     After skimming/reading the article I have found it to be extremely objective.

+ c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?

+ d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?

i.  The article seems to cover all of the subjects it should when it comes to slavery: the definition, its history worldwide, and its status as a part of modern society today.

+ e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?

i. There are a couple of subheadings that are a bit lengthy in comparison to the others, like the Economics subheading under History but there are also a couple that are lacking.

+ f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?

                    i. No, the article definitely has enough references. It cites over 200 sources.

+ 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. I do not see evidence of disrespect in the dialogue between the editors.

__________________________

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)

This article is very current. It has been edited consistently every month for the past two years (since 2013).

+ Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?)

I did not find evidence that suggests that the editors have any

+ Relevance (to your research topic)

This entry is not very relevant to my research topic because although it is about slavery, it does not relate slavery to Christianity or the so-called “justification” of slavery by slave owners in the American south.

+ Depth

I think there is enough depth on the topic.

+ Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.)

This website encyclopedia entry is meant for general adult audiences.

+ Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?)

This entry is meant to inform the public on what slavery is and its history.