User:Abrahamrhoffman/sandbox: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:11, 15 April 2019

This is a user sandbox of Abrahamrhoffman. 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.

Get Help

Article evaluation

Final Topic: Information Theory

Article Review

[April 15th, 2019] Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Shannon

Q1. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? The article is directly about the life of Claude E. Shannon, the creator of Information Theory. While the short biography was interesting, there was little detail on Information Theory itself, but more details on the accomplishments that Shannon received throughout his life.

Q2. Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article is describing events that occurred in Claude Shannon's life, but it does seem biased. The words and phrases chosen exalt Shannon's life and accomplishments and demonstrate respect for the work he performed in the field.

Q3. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented? Certain aspects of Shannon's life are overrepresented, such as his accomplishments and awards. I would have liked to see more about his personal life and struggles with his ideas.

Q4. Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? Yes, the cited links work and they do support the claims in the article.

Q5. 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? The facts are referenced as a whole, instead of individually. The information comes from scholarly journals and published books. The bias is present, and is not noted.

Q6. Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? The information appears up-to-date. I would like to see a more holistic approach to Shannon's life including personal and professional struggles and details about Information Theory.

Q7. 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? Some pretty in-depth conversations are presented in the 'Talk' part of the page. Though mostly, the conversations relate to highlighting aspects of Shannon's life that are 'relevant'.

Q8. How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is not rated and is not a part of any WikiProject.

Q9. How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There is less control in the way citations are crafted. Editors seem to be more interested in representing their ideas, instead of finding valid sources from which to cite.

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 === Article Review ===
 [April 15th, 2019]
-Article https://www.itsoc.org/about/shannon
+Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Shannon
+''Q1.'' Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
+The article is directly about the life of Claude E. Shannon, the creator of Information Theory. While the short biography was interesting, there was little detail on Information Theory itself, but more details on the accomplishments that Shannon received throughout his life.
+''Q2.'' Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
+The article is describing events that occurred in Claude Shannon's life, but it does seem biased. The words and phrases chosen exalt Shannon's life and accomplishments and demonstrate respect for the work he performed in the field.
+''Q3.'' Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented?
+Certain aspects of Shannon's life are overrepresented, such as his accomplishments and awards. I would have liked to see more about his personal life and struggles with his ideas.
+''Q4.'' Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
+Yes, the cited links work and they do support the claims in the article.
+''Q5.'' 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?
+The facts are referenced as a whole, instead of individually. The information comes from scholarly journals and published books. The bias is present, and is not noted.
+''Q6.'' Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
+The information appears up-to-date. I would like to see a more holistic approach to Shannon's life including personal and professional struggles and details about Information Theory.
+''Q7.'' 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?
+Some pretty in-depth conversations are presented in the 'Talk' part of the page. Though mostly, the conversations relate to highlighting aspects of Shannon's life that are 'relevant'.
+''Q8.'' How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
+It is not rated and is not a part of any WikiProject.
+''Q9.'' How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
+There is less control in the way citations are crafted. Editors seem to be more interested in representing their ideas, instead of finding valid sources from which to cite.