User:Cunningham.734/sandbox
 | This is a user sandbox of Cunningham.734. 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. |
[1]Boldly [[boldness]] linking where no one linked before
Proxy (Climate) Sandbox Notes:
- Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?
- Not every single fact is referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference. However, most paragraphs have about 1-2 references cited. The paragraph sections titled “Proxies”, “Tree Rings”, and “Corals” seem to be lacking references.
- Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
- Everything in the article seems to be relevant. The only thing that distracted me was all of the math and equations under the paragraph “Water isotopes and temperature reconstruction”. Is this section necessary? Again, I am not very knowledgeable on this topic.
- Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- The article appears to be neutral.
- Where does the information come from? Check the sources. Are they neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
- Most of the articles are neutral, reliable sources. However, I noticed that source 13 links directly to CNN’s website. I believe this may be biased.
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Check a few citations & references. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article?
- There is definitely more information reported on “Boreholes” than “Fossil Leaves”. A lot of the references linked correctly.
- Is the page locked? Take a look at Wikipedia's protection policy - what is good or bad about this policy? How could it be abused?
- No, the Proxy (Climate) article is not locked. From my point of view, I know very little about this subject (if anything) but have the ability to edit the information at the drop of a hat. Looking into Wikipedia’s protection policy, some articles may be placed under different levels of protection by Wikipedia admins, in order to prevent over-modification. The good part about this feature is security aspect, as it works to keep factual, good content safe from edits with misleading intentions. The bad part of this feature is that it may prevent worthy and intelligent edits from being made.
- Is any information in the article that is out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
- Most of the information comes from sources that were published 2000-2016, what is considered out of date?
- ^ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration". NASA. Retrieved 2017-02-06.