User:TBDoten/sandbox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Article Review: Shark Anatomy
Link: Shark anatomy
- When talking about the tails of different species of sharks, the second bullet point refers to "typical sharks". Although it references the requiem shark as a typical shark, the phrase "typical shark" is very broad and not specific in any way. As a reader who does not know much about sharks, this is very misleading. There are many sharks that come to mind when thinking about a "typical shark", it is not specific enough and not informative.
- The information in this article is relevant. However, the information feels very superficial. Including information about past ancestors and how the anatomy of the shark got to where it is would help the reader understand the information better. I believe this article could dive a little deeper into these topics.
- Although the information about sharks seems neutral. Many of the citations come from the same sources. There is a lot of information abut sharks in scientific research. A wider range of sources should be included, the repetition of citations may be a red flag that it could be bias in some way.
- In the respiratory system section, there is information that is cited with "citation still needed". As a reader this is information that may not be trustworthy. It could be an opinion of who wrote the article. This may not be backed up with a reliable source. This is an incorrect way to site information. Information that is included in this article should be backed up with reliable sources. Other citations are referenced correctly.
- The internal glands section leaves out information about the spleen and rectal glands. This is a content gap that could be explored and added to this article.
- This article is a part of some wiki projects such as; wikiproject Sharks, wikiproject Fishes, and wikiproject Animal Anatomy.
- There are no conversations occurring in the talk page of this article.
- This article was subjected to Wiki education courses in 2019 and in 2020. The information is up to date but there are several parts missing.
-The "see also" section could also be broadened more. Currently it only leads to fish anatomy. I believe this article could also be tied into sharks, vertebrates, Chondrichthyes, etc.
~~~~TBDoten
Group question on the article: Shark anatomy
When reading through this article we noticed some content gaps where certain areas were left blank. Our question is what is the function of the shark's spleen and rectal gland? Where are these organs located and what do they look like?
Discussion: Plagiarism
Individual thoughts
- Blog posts and press releases are considered poor sources of reliable information because it is most likely biased. Although the information may be "reliable information" they most likely based their opinions on one sided sources. A good source, would include both sides of an argument. Blog posts and press releases can leave out information and may only present information that will benefit themselves.
-Companies and businesses will only show the positive side of themselves on the internet. If they are less desirable in certain areas compared to their competitors, they will not include it in their website. They want to look good on the internet in order to reel in possible customers.
-The difference between a copyright violation and plagiarism is that in a copyright violation, a specific part of an idea or words are used. In plagiarism the whole idea and concept is copied without giving a reference of where it comes from. incorrectly citing a source could also be considered a copyright violation.
- Good techniques to avoid plagiarism is to make sure you are keeping track of the sources that you use, incorporating your own words and phrases, and to paraphrase the quote.