User:Ashlenrich/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Article 1: Kid Cudi Kid Cudi

1. This article that I chose to critique is about one of my favorite Rap artists, Scott Mescudi, also known as his rapper name, Kid Cudi. This article explains his personal life, music career and acting career, other ventures, and his artistry. It is moderate in length and gets the point across, not going into extended detail.
2. All of the references within the article are from reliable sources. A large number of the references come from different interviews with Mescudi himself.
3. The content included in the article all pertains to the topic of it. While reading it, I didn't get distracted by any material or information that didn't belong.
4. This article is mainly a biography for Scott "Kid Cudi" Mescudi. Any claims within the article are true and the author and editors remain unbiased.
5. The information put into this article comes from neutral sources, such as musical magazines, interviews, and news forums like The New York Times. I didn't spot any biased statements that were noted or should have been noted.
6. I do not understand how to answer the question on if the viewpoints are underrepresented or overrepresented.
7. The citations that I chose to click on all worked. I think there is a lot of paraphrasing in the article that could be mistaken for plagiarism.
8. All of the information in this article is all up to date, even his recent mental issues and his new album that recently came out, which was surprising.
9. The talk page points out some topics within the article that should be put into more detail. Reading the talk page opened up my eyes to ways the article can be made superior.
10. This article is rated as a C-class. The rate it got makes sense because it did have most of the information needed but it never went into extreme detail on any of that.

Article 2: Pugs Pug

1. For my second article, I decided to read up on my favorite dog bread, Pugs. Th article explains their characteristics, history and origins, and their health problems. It is a short article that covers all that is needed to know about pugs.
2. A lot of the references come from books that include information on this special breed. Reading through the references, I believe that they are truly reliable.
3. All the information put into this certain article has to do with the ongoing topic of pugs. I believe that the information all belongs and makes sense.
4. I do not feel that the topic of pugs has any claims to a certain side. It is an article explaining the type of dog and all about them. Author and editors are unbiased throughout the entire article.
5. the information gathered to develop this article comes from neutral sources such as books and websites writing about types of dogs. There seem to be no biased statements that I saw or that were stated.
6. I do not understand how to answer the question on if the viewpoints are underrepresented or overrepresented.
7. The citations that I chose to click on all worked. I think there is a lot of paraphrasing in the article that could be mistaken for plagiarism.
8. There is no new information that is not already in this article; It's all up to date.
9. The talk page included general fixes and information that needed to be added to the topic of health problems pugs have.
10. The article is rated as a good article and had a mid-importance level. I agree with both of the ratings because yes it was a good article with a lot of information and it is not a very important article to be written.