User:198.190.214.4/sandbox
Article Evaluation -- History of Human Rights
- Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
Everything in the article is related to the topic. It is very detailed and has many different examples. Nothing really distracted me too much and that s what i liked about it.
- Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
The article is very nuetral. The author is not taking any sides, only stating facts of history.
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
I dont think there are any that are over or under represented. Each viewpoint is a few paragraphs with a picture.
- Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
The one cited source was a working and reliable link. It definitely supports the claim as well.
- Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
No, but majority of them are. There was only two without an article to go with it.
- Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
No none of the information is outdated, but more present topics could be added.
- Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
They are talking about how to fix citations, and some things needed to be taken out or rearranged.
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
I dont think it is rated because I dont see anywhere that talks about it being apart of anything.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
This article is being very detailed on many topics, while in class we've only went into detail with one topic.