User:Carlosr1646/sandbox
81.2 % Mid Term Quiz [Part 1, each question is worth 3.8 % for full credit, for Part II, each question is work 5 % for full credit] (Carlos, don't be too distressed about this low B grade. Just remember to provide responses for questions; your responses were good for almost every question.]
[edit]My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Spring 2016
3.8 My real name is: Carlos Rodriguez
0 My Research Topic is:
3.8 Key words related to my Research Topic are: religion and sports,
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:
3.8 + 2 I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)
https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Ancient_Olympic_Games
Use the criteria from the Evaluating Wikipedia brochure to evaluate the article.
3.8 1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article? Yes or No
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?
0 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.
3.8 2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?
Yes it explains how the games started as a series of athletic events for the Ancient god Zeus, and it explains how religion has been incorporated in it as well.
3.8 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 provides an image of the palaestra of Olympia , and goes into detail on how the Olympic games goes back to 776 BC. There all other headings in this article that talk about the games and religion, culture and also victory ceremonies.
3.8 4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?
Yes the various aspects are well balanced because it provides enough information on the other parts of the ancient Olympic games such as the Olympia the site where the Olympic games where started, the mythology, the athletes point of view and also descriptions of the sporting events.
3.8 5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?
Yes it does read like an encyclopedia article because it provides facts and it does not seem like this is filled with people's personal opinions.
3.8 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.
7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:
3.8 a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English?
Yes it is, because it has no warning banners or other warnings.
3.8 b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”?
No there are no opinions, all facts on the background of the olympic games.
3.8 c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?
No the article has the list of authors and people that helped make that article.
3.8 d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?
No, because it just leaves out the small information that isn't really necessary to know about the Olympic games but includes plenty of important information on the Olympic games.
3.8 e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?
Yes but I find that as a good thing because the sections that are usually longer are the sections that are the most important about the subject.
3.8 f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?
No, this article has 14 references listed so that is more than enough.
3.8 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?
Yes all the editors are trying to incorporate their own knowledge on the subject but other editors don't agree that some of the stuff they write are facts.
__________________________
Part 2:
Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:
5 Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History)
May 3,2016
0 Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?)
0 Relevance (to your research topic)
0 Depth
Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.)
3 Article [yes, and, you need to specify that it is written for a general audience, (and not targeted to researchers)]
5 Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?)
To provide information on the background of the Olympic Games.