User:Laureenstewart98/sandbox

Wikipedia Evaluation

- Wikipedia Article (Credibility)

• There are two sides to credibility: Trustworthiness and expertise
• 4 types of credibility talked about in this article: (1) Journalistic , (2) Scientific , (3) Street , and (4) Two-phase model
• Journalistic - Professionalism must take place in order for it to be credible.
• Scientific - Science is viewed as one of the most credible sources of information around the world.
• Street - How much of something someone says on the street is credible.
• Two-phase model - if understandability isn't reached, than the other three validity claims ( Truth, Sincerity, Appropriateness ) don't matter.

Questions

1. Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference?

Yes, each fact has an appropriate and reliable reference. There are a total of 16 references in this article, each fact has a number by is that brings you to the references.

2. Where does the information come from?

The information comes from a variety of different websites and books.

3. If biased, is that bias noted? 

I don't think the article is biased, you can't be biased on Wikipedia. You just have to give straight facts that allows the reader to come up with their own conclusion.

4. 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? 

The only thing that was edited in this article was one of the external links.

5. How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

I do not see a rating for this article.

- Wikipedia Essay (The Earth is Flat)

• Wikipedia has numerous amounts of volunteer editors. People are allowed to edit pages whenever they please to better the page.
• Students have single handedly added 25 million words to Wikipedia.
• Professors have come to find that students put more effort into the Wikipedia assignments since it can be viewed by millions of people, not just the professor and the classmates.
• Wikipedia offers a talk page on every article so changes can be discussed.

Questions

1. What did you learn about Wikipedia that you didn't already know? 

I didn't know that students have single handedly added 25 million words to Wikipedia. I sort of figured that people who put content on this site would take it more seriously than they would just writing an essay. Millions of people see your content a day, so you want to make sure that it is reliable and well said.

-Wikipedia Police or Guidelines (Neutral Point of View)

• Articles should focus on the majority's point of view rather than the minority's point of view.
• Adding tiny-minority point of views may confuse the reader and be misleading.
• Views held by tiny-minority groups should not be confused with the significant minority. You have to be careful how you put it, so that the reader does not get confused.
• Telling the difference between facts and opinions - Every source is reliable for its own opinion, but not every opinion is relevant. If a fact seems to be of higher importance, than the reliability needs to be higher.
• Reliability can help judge due weight - Self published sources have less of a reliability because they have not been verified. If a writer is biased, it should be taken into account when using their source or stating his/her opinion in an article. A source becomes more reliable if it is cited by a generally reliable source.

Questions

1. What surprises you about this specific rule or guideline? 

I didn't realize how much had to be considered when using a source and figuring out if it is reliable or not.

2. If you had to summarize this rule or guideline into one sentence, how would you describe it? 

The majority view always wins, and if your source isn't verified, or is opinion based, think twice about using it.