 | This is a user sandbox of Brianard 97. 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. |
91.67 % + = full credit | = half credit - = zero credit
My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Winter 2016
My real name is:Briana Darden
My Research Topic is: What is the difference between Religion and Spirituality?
Key words related to my Research Topic are: Spirituality/Religion
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:
+ I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.) Spiritual but not religious
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? Yes or No No
If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.
This article relies largely or entirely upon a single source. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please help improve this article by introducing citations to additional sources. (November 2013)
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?
+ That issue it mentioned because the article may not have enough information in it and/or it is extremely biased.
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.
+ 2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?
The lead section of the article is easy to understand, however it does use some words that some people may not understand. It summarizes the article as a whole not necessarily the key points.
+ 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?”
The structure of the article is clear. Every different topic has a heading and there are two sections with subheadings. There are not images diagrams, or footnotes.
+ 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 article actually goes more in depth about spirituality than I thought it would.
+5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?
It does read like a persuasive essay but there is a criticism section that explains how people that are religious view spirituality
+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.
The references seem to be reliable, I saw many references from journals and articles from colleges.
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 the lead section is well written and uses correct grammar.
+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”?
I believe all the statements are backed up by sources.
+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?
The article does use the terms "many people" and "some people" but I believe they are stating facts.
+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?
The article seems to provide the important information for the topic.
+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?
The only short section is the section about supernatural spirituality, however I believe it was just mentioned so readers could know that it exist.
+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?
+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?
No, I see people asking questions about how to edit things and people respectfully answering them.
__________________________
Part 2:
Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:
+Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History)
February 2,2016
+Authority, (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?)
I'm not sure about the actual authors of this article however, the people who have added to this page used many different credible sources.
+Relevance (to your research topic)
This article is very relevant to my research topic.
+Depth
There are references and a couple of footnotes.
-Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.)
Research Article
+Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?)
To inform readers about Spirituality and the many different aspects of it.