Evaluating Wikipedia 4/19
Article-Priviledge (Social Inequality) 1. Each fact in this wikipedia article is referenced to an appropriate and reliable source. Most of the citations of information come from other article or posts on wikipedia. A couple of the sentences referring to a citation should have references, but fail to have them. The article I chose was about privilege and social inequality so the writer and all it's editors I think tried to stay as biased as they could, but failed in some areas.
2. On the talk page I realized that a lot of my own thinking was being discussed. For example the fact that I believe that the author attempted to remain as biased as they could but could not. Most of the people talking within the talk page were talking about how most of this article needs to be fixed or changed.
3. This article is apart of two separate Wikiprojects; Wikiproject Philosophy and Wikiproject Sociology. Both projects rate the article as a start-class on the articles quality scale, which means that it is a developing article and could use some work. Only one of the Wikiprojects, Wikiproject Philosophy, rated this article a mid-importance on the importance scale. As an article rated mid-importance, it means that the article covers important information, but doesn't cover a topic that necessarily fits in with the Wikiproject.
Essay-How Wikipedia is Hostile to Women. While reading this essay, I became suddenly aware that there is a ginormous gender gap within the frequent authors/editors on Wikipedia. The essay spoke of a certain incident including a female editor who was being harassed by a male editor repeatedly. I didn't think that harassment between genders would even be a thing on this site being that there is many rules or regulations taught to you when learning how to use this site and being respectful is included. Wikipedia created a project to break the gender gap. The female user who happened to be harassed ws added into this project, but it didn't seem to change the fact that the male editors around her continued to harass her on a lot of the talk pages for articles. I really wasn't aware that it was the think to do on wikipedia....to have male editors go out of their way, on a domain made for putting out information, to harass female editors or authors. It's actually absolutely awful that it is happening and continues to happen.
Wikipedia's Policy-Neutral Point of View This policy is a well-followed policy by majority of the editors. To summarize the policy in one sentence, it basically means that all editors on Wikipedia may explain both sides of any article, but must remain biased. It's not a forum where they can throw out their own opinion. Its a forum for information and all true information.
Start a discussion with Ashlenrich
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. Start a new discussion to connect and collaborate with Ashlenrich. What you say here will be public for others to see.
