User talk:Scb422

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hello, Scb422, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help.We're so glad you're here! Matthewvetter (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Evaluation

Betty Holberton

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? I believe that each fact is referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference.

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Yes, everything in the article is relevant to the article topic. If anything, each section could be expanded.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? It focuses on a specific woman's struggle in her professional life and how she overcame it to become successful, but I would not say that it was biases by any means.

Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that biased noted? The sources that I checked seemed to be neutral sources. Some of the sources include The New York Times and an article on technology in general with no biases towards women.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I do not feel that the viewpoints were underrepresented and that each could be expanded on. I do feel that the viewpoint on her career was a little overwhelming just because it was much longer than the other sections and I also feel that this section could be split into two.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? Out of the five citations that I checked, only one of them did not work. I did not see any signs of close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? Most of the references are from the early 2000's and could be updated a bit. I feel that the section that discusses Betty Holberton's early life could be greatly expanded as well as the overview at the beginning of the article. I also feel that the career section could be split into two parts, one section could describe her career and the different positions she held and another section could describe her achievements during her career. I feel that there is an extensive amount of information for both of these to stand alone and be extended farther.

Scb422 (talk) 18:18, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]