User:AshMillette/sandbox

Plan of Action for Improving an Article: Absalom, Absalom!

• What content would you want to contribute?

The Light in August article has sections for characters, style and structure, themes, and reception, whereas the Absalom, Absalom! article does not. Out of the missing categories for Absalom, Absalom!, I would want to contribute information on the reception of the article from the general public as well as more information about the critical reception of the book. The article for Light in August has a whole section about the reception of the novel, both when it was first published and how the public reacted as well as how critics have perceived it, whereas the article for Absalom, Absalom! has very little in regards to critical reception; there is a little in regards to critical reception under the analysis section, but it is not clearly delineated, and the influence and significance section only beings to hit at the general public reception.

• What research steps would you take to get that information?

In order to get the information, I would look for book chapters or sections, journal articles, and reviews, and maybe newspaper articles in regards to both general and critical reception. I would look at databases like MLA International Bibliography and Literature Criticism Online, do searches on Valpo's database, and see what my public library has.

• What recommendations would you propose to the style or organization?

In terms of organization, I would recommend adding more to the lede to give it more substance and balance, as it is the shortest of the sections. I would also recommend adding more sections similar to the Light in August article. And this is probably petty, but I would rename the "Notes" section "References."

Article Evaluation (Wikipedia's article on Feed)

• Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

Everything in the article is relevant to the topic, and the categories are well delineated.

• Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

There is a possibility that there is bias in the plot, synopsis, and authority sections because no references are cited.

• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

The article relies heavily on the plot summary and synopsis, which do not have any references.

• Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?

The link for citation 12 does not work; when I click on it, it says "Page not found." The links for citations 9-11 work though. These links are for the "Awards and nominations" section, so their purpose is not to support the claims in the article. The other sources that do support the claims in the article are from scholarly journals and other credible outlets.

• 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 overview, plot, synopsis, and authority sections do not have any reference links. But the other sections have reliable references to support the facts, and the information comes from scholarly sources like journal articles.

• Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

The information is not out of date, and the page was last edited on 28 March 2018. I do not think that anything is missing.

• 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?

There is a section on the Talk page about words used in the novel, multiple sections for edit plans, feedback sections, and modified links sections. One of the main concerns is the overrepresentation of plot and the lack of references for some sections.

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

The article is part of Wikiproject Novels and is rated C-class and mid-importance.

• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

The article's discussion of the novel aligns pretty well to how we talked about it in class, but the authority section differs a bit by portraying Titus as basically having no authority.