Criterion E Evaluation

Criterion A: Investigation
For investigation we were supposed to research what wiki's are all about, who creates them, why we would use them and who edits them. We also were supposed to state what our task was and why it is important for us to do this task. Then we were supposed to research about Wikipedia and then give our opinions on if we think it is reliable or not. After that we were meant to pair p with a person we did not yet work with and then create a method of finding inaccuracies on Wikipedia and then test our method

I believe that i answered all the questions we were meant to answer and posted them on my blog, including the research that i made. I worked with Urangoo on the method and testing the method.

I think that i did all the research that was required and the method was quite decent also. I could have found a different article where there were more inaccuracies, because all Urangoo and I found was an old population that was not accurate enough. The rest was correct information


Criterion B: Design
For design, we were supposed to post the article we were going to edit on our blog. We should have highlighted all the information we were going to edit and research properly using a variety or reliable sources to support our editing of the article. After gathering the research we should have cited our sources and made our design specifications list.

I believe i did all the required things we needed to do, except instead of posting the article we will change on our blog, we edited first and posted our edited article on our blog only.

I think that we should have read everything before we started doing it so we would follow the instructions and that's about it.


Criterion D: Design
For criterion D we were supposed to show our edited article to ms. Wilson to approve of, sign the responsibility agreement, after ms. Wilson checked the article we edit it on Wikipedia including our citations

We did the editing already with ms .Wilson's consent and we edited the article properly with our sources there.

I don't think that there was anything i could change or improve upon.

Evaluation:
Our edited part of the article did not stay on, but then we were unsure if we cited it properly or saved it properly so we re-edited the article today and we will see next class if it was changed back to its original information. The editing of the article should not have an impact on society, maybe a foreigners perception of Mongolia, thinking that its a more developed country now that it has a higher population, unlike the mistake that wikipedia had, saying it was around 2.5 million, even though it is over 3 million now.
Today i checked the wikipedia page again and our edited population was still there. We must have made some kind of mistake with the citation or the wikipedia editors disagreed without checking our source.