Wikipedia worksheet

16 and Pregnant Wikipedia article  

This article or section has multiple issues.	Yes
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.	Yes
The neutrality of this article is disputed.	No
The factual accuracy of this article is disputed.	No
This needs copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone or spelling.	No
This may contain material not appropriate for an encyclopedia.	No
This article only describes one highly specialized aspect of its associated subject.	No
This article requires authentication or verification by an expert.	Somewhat useful information
This article or section needs to be updated.	No
This article may not provide balanced geographical coverage on a region.	No
This is missing citations or needs footnotes.	No
This article does not cite any references or sources.	No, it does

2.        Read through the article and see if it meets the following requirements:

Is it written in a clear and organized way?	Yes
Is the tone neutral (not taking sides)?	Yes
Are all important facts referenced (you're told where they come from)?	Yes, very
Does the information provided seem complete or does it look like there are gaps (or just one side of the story)?	Complete

1.    Scroll down to the article's References and open them in new windows or tabs. Do they seem like reliable sources? (For help in determining the general reliability of a source, check out the Knowing What's What and What's Note: The 5 Ws (and 1 "H") of Cyberspace handout.)

Reliable references:

^ Real Life Is Like Juno, Except Maybe the Dialogue, a 11 June 2009 article from The New York Times

^ Nielsens: Baseball very very good to Fox, a 21 July 2009 article from USA Today

                  ^ 'No Easy Decision' Special - Extended Interview at mtv.co



Possibly unreliable references:
^ "Maci" and "Bentley" soar in baby name game Reuters, May 16, 2011


Definitely unreliable references:

^ http://thestir.cafemom.com/toddler/126351/16_and_pregnant_stars_arrested



 

4.        Click on the Discussion tab. How is the article rated on the Rating Scale(Stub, Start, C, B, GA, A, FA)? What issues around the article are being discussed? Do any of them make you doubt the article's reliability?

Start class on quality scale

Low importance on projects importance scale

5.        Based on the above questions, give the article an overall ranking ofReliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable.

• You may use a Reliable article as a source (but remember that even if a Wikipedia article is reliable, it should never be your only source on a topic!)
• You may use a Partially Reliable article as a starting point for your research, and may use some
  of its references as sources, but do not us it as a source.
• You should not use an Unreliable article as a source or a starting point. Research the same topic in a different encyclopedia.

How did you rank this article (Reliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable)? Give at least three reasons to support
your answer.

I rank this article very reliable, because it’s something I know very much about, so, it’s very reliable and helpful in my eyes.