User:Melody Skies/sandbox

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Fall 2015

My real name is: Melody Platt

My Research Topic is: Healing and music

Key words related to my Research Topic are: Healing, Music

Next 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: Energy medicine (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? No

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here. "This article does not cite any references (sources)"

Write a brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. Citations are how we can check resources used and make sure the information given is reliable and accurate.

2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? Yes and yes

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

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 - gives both sides of any opinions on the matter

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. Yes

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 - Very easy to understand and it's easy to follow links to other Wikipedia pages if a word is unclear

b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? Kind of - there are some parts of the article that seem to be biased against energy medicine

c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? Not that I noticed

d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? No - "Energy medicine" can encompass energy that is religiously oriented and not and healing other topics mentioned in the articule

e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? Polarity therapy is a little bit short, but everything has general coverage at least

f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? No - many citations, footnotes and references are given

g. Look at the Talk Page 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? No - there was one editor who seemed to get a little bit upset due to the article being slightly biased, but there was no direct hostility towards another editor.