User talk:Anettemgonzalez
Anettemgonzalez, you are invited to the Teahouse!
[edit]
|
Hi Anettemgonzalez! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 25 March 2017 (UTC) |
Evaluating Articles and Sources Training and Rhetorical Analysis
[edit]Chopped (TV Show)
Strengths A lead section that gives an easy-to-understand overview the article summarize the main points of the show on how it is run, different types of specials and an example of an episode so the reader knows the format of the show.
A clear structure The structure is clear by staying on topic when there are new paragraphs and the article flows well.
Balanced coverage More important views are talked about more in the article like the format of the show. The article isn’t too long but it is very detailed when it needs to be. It covers on how special episodes are about, for example the Chopped Champions episodes, it describes how there are four different competitions to become the champion.
Neutral content The article isn’t biased and there isn’t a particular voice that expresses any emotion. The article is straight to the point with enough information.
Weaknesses Reliable sources The article does not have reliable sources because there are some from a blog post which means the information on the article is opinionated. Most of the sources used are from the Food Network website.
Question 4
When was the article started? January 21, 2009 How did the article look in its early stages? There was only one paragraph that was not very detailed describing the show. There was no mention on when the show sharted or how many seasons the show had. It just gave a brief description on the rules of the show. How/when was material added? More material was added five days after the wikipedia page for the show was started. The first edit after the original page just corrected a link. By whom? DragonStargazer How long did it take to get to its current stage? It took about six years after the original page was up. Now, it adds more description on the special episodes and guest stars. How recently have edits been made? During March, six edits have been made. The last one was made on March 27, 2017. Is it still active? Yes. There has been new edits since the start of the page because the show is still currently on air so more information will be added as it goes on.
Question 5
How actively did the editors use it? There really isn’t a conversation for this page but two or three people asked questions and they were very detailed on what they wanted to make the page more accurate. For what reason? Asking questions and others’ opinions to improve the page. How would you describe the tone of the conversation? The tone was chill and informative. Those who were answering the question, they gave examples to make sure the one who was asking the question will understand.
Do you see the same editors here that you saw on the history page?
Not really, just one from the talk page was editing the page.
Wikipedia Essentials Training and Critique/Edit an Article
[edit]Lady Gaga
Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? The article is on Lady Gaga and there isn’t really anything that is considered a “reliable source” on this particular article. Many of the sources used for this article are from interviews and magazines so maybe for this particular subject of a musical artist, it is considered appropriate to use magazines as a reliable reference.
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
Yes, everything in this article is relevant to Lady Gaga. It talks about her life before being famous, her education, family and how she started to gain fame.
Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Yes. The article focuses on her life and things that she said in interviews. I guess you can argue that it does focus on a particular biased position because the article is on Lady Gaga, but overall the article mainly focuses on Lady Gaga’s life and accomplishments.
Where does the information come from? Are there enough and a variety of sources? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? - The information came from tv interviews, and magazine articles that she did throughout her career. There doesn’t seem to be enough types of sources because they are all either magazines or interviews but the magazines and articles used were not the same. The articles used do seem a bit biased because they only mention Lady Gaga’s highlights throughout her career, not really mentioning anything bad (she’s great so there isn’t anything bad haha).
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Main parts of the article mentions her sense of style in both clothing and music throughout her career. It doesn’t talk about her personal life compared her to her music which is a positive since she has a very public life, it is nice to know that people respect her privacy and not write it in wikipedia.
Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article?
The links do work but there are some close paraphrasing in the article and direct quotes from Lady Gaga.
Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
The article seemed pretty up to date. The most recent edit was made on April 3, 2017 and nothing seems to be missing from the article.
Based on your analysis, what changes would you make to the article to improve the verifiability and notability?
The article is very thorough and up to date. I would change the direct phrasing from the articles just so it won’t be considered plagiarism.
Brainstorming
[edit]1. Scott Disick YES! 2. Immaculate Conception School (Chicago, IL.) 3. The Poison Apples no 4. La Adelita no 5. Chokers no 6. Braids no 7. 30 Seconds to Mars no 8. The Neighbourhood no 9. Wikipedia no 10. Mr. Nobody no 11. 90s Grunge no 12. Nikkitutorials 13. Morphe Cosmetics 14. Justin Prentice 15. Lady Gaga no
Verifiable and Notable Reasons Scott Discik is well known in the Reality TV world because of his association with the Kardashians. It would be notable to know what his past life and what type of work he was involved in before the Kardashians. This page would be verifiable because he is currently on Keeping up with the Kardashians and there are already so many articles that are written about him. It would be nice to have a place to have all of the articles in one place. Most of the sources for this page would be found in magazines, gossip articles and the show itself.
Any interested sources that not directly related to Scott Disick could be the producers of Keeping Up with the Kardashians, the women he has dated, the club owners he made appearances at and his educational background like his high school.
List of Other Pages Keeping Up with the Kardashians the Kardashian Family