User:Mp4lyfe/sandbox

This is a user sandbox of Mp4lyfe. 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

Hi, I am Mp4lyfe, I like Hiking, aviation, and traveling

Article Evaluation: Relevancy: The article is pretty relevant to the topic, nothing is too distracting.

Is anything missing: Transportation is missing some things, it says the WP&YR still transports cargo and I am pretty sure this is false/out of date, doesn't mention transportation within the city.

what could be improved: Adding more info about the WP&YR and cruise ship industry, as well as some information about the city itself

Neutrality: The article is neutral, no bias

Viewpoints: Everything seems to be equally represented

Citations: The citations work and support the claims, some things still need a citation, Facts that are cited do have good unbiased sources, but several claims still need sources and don't show where the information came from.

Talk page: The only conversation is about its climate, only two people have said anything

rating: The article has a B-class rating and is in the Alaska and United States Wikiproject.

3 potential articles: - Canby High School - Skagway River - Human Lunar Return study

The article's content is relevant to the subject but the content is severely lacking. It has a short paragraph about graduation numbers for 2008, a short project about one of its home-building programs, and a list of a couple of sports the school plays. The page is written neutrally, there isn't much in the article to have a bias on. Many claims aren't cited, such as championship dates and the academic claims. The article only has 4 sources, one of which is no longer online, however, the other 3 seem to be good sources. 2 are from The Oregonian's website and one is from a public schools reporting website.

Talk page: There is nothing currently on the talk page, I would make a post on the talk page asking for help finding updated sources to verify all the claims made in the article, I would also suggest adding more sports to the sports section, as Canby High School has more than 3 sports teams. I also believe a section should be added for theater.

Sources: http://www.osaa.org/schools/76 This source provides a much better list of sports teams at the high school and provides a more detailed description than what is on the Wikipedia article, the source is reliable and up to date.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/oregon/districts/canby-sd-86/canby-high-school-16427 This source provides better information on demographics and school performance, USnews.com seems to be a reliable source and is updated regularly

The article's content is relevant to the subject and is written neutrally. The article lacks organization/heading of any kind, it is just one big paragraph. The article only has 2 sources and they are not enough to verify all the claims made in the article. The article should be both expanded and have sources added to verify its claims. The two citations it has come from reliable sources, One is from a Canadian website and the other is from a geographic .gov website.

Talk page: There is nothing on the talk page, I would make a request on the talk page for someone to organize the article, to make an introduction and create headings for the information that is already there. I would also ask for help finding more sources to verify the claims already made and to add more information to the article.

Sources: http://dnr.alaska.gov/mlw/nav/naar/skagwayriver/skagway_river_nav_report_pdf_revised_2012.pdf This source has a lot of information about the Skagway rivers history, it is a reliable source published by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources

https://www.nps.gov/klgo/learn/historyculture/1901-flood.htm Information about a large flood that could be added to the page, comes from the National Parks Service website, reliable source

The article's content is relevant and is organized into several headings. There is no bias that I can see in the article. Some claims still need citations, two of the citations come from .org websites, one is from an official NASA document. The third citation is no longer online and needs to be updated.

Talk page: I would ask for an updated source to fix the broken one and to also find more sources so the information in the article can be expanded.

There is very little information online for this one, the article probably can't be expanded much more than it already is.

Sources: http://space.nss.org/lunar-base-studies-1996-human-lunar-return/ Contains info on what the study accomplished, its proposed cost, and info on the people involved, contains far more information than the Wikipedia article. Comes from the National Space Societies website, seems reliable

The article contains general information on the European Unions space policy. It goes into detail about some of the programs the European Union is funding and planning on creating. The article mostly focuses on a 2007 meeting a lot of the information is outdated and new information has been released since that would add depth to the article.

The EU has listed some of the benefits of space-based applications and I think these could be added or mentioned in the article. The European Union also tracks things in orbit to watch for possible collisions and to monitor space debris entering the Earth's atmosphere, this could also be added to the article. The Horizon 2020 program is mentioned on the EU's website but isn't in the article, this could also be added.

I am not sure if the space-based applications should be added, the article mostly focuses on what exactly the EU is funding/planning and not on their reasoning for doing so.

Sources: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/space_en This source is already on the Wikipedia page but it hasn't been used to update information in a while, there is far more information provided by this source then there is on the Wikipedia page. The source is credible, it is on the European Commissions website, and while not stating when it was last updated, it has to have been within the last 2 years as it mentions programs it started in the year 2016.

https://europa.eu/european-union/topics/space_en This source is new, from may of 2018, and it contains new information (Horizons 2020 program), it is from an official European Union website and doesn't have any bias. This source contains more in-depth information on many of the programs already mentioned in the Wikipedia article, This source could be used to add detail and increase the length of the Wikipedia article.

http://politics.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-183: This source goes into more detail on the origin of European Space policy, it doesn't contain very much useful information on the programs that weren't in the other sources but it could be useful for expanding the introduction on the Wikipedia page. The source seems credible, published on the Oxford Research Encyclopedias website, published in 2017, the information is up to date and not biased.

I think the best article to focus on improving is the Space policy of the European Union article. I have an interest in the topic and it seems to be the article most clearly in need of updating, the other articles have very little information that isn't already presented but this one has quite a lot that can be added. There seem to be a wide variety of sources even outside the ones I listed in its evaluation. I think the first 3 things to improve in the article are the introduction, which could use more information on the origins of the European space policy, the programs it is funding, which is missing several new ones that should be added (EGNOS, Horizon 2020), and lastly, the new information on its tracking of objects in orbit and re-entering the atmosphere. The Space Surveillance and tracking support framework became operational in July 2016 and is not mentioned in the Wikipedia article at all.