User:ChuongNguyen662/sandbox

Article Evaluation

I chose the Utopian Studies article and found that it was a very poorly written page. The page it self is bare bones, having almost no content on it whatsoever. The information presented is just links to other articles or just names to famous people who have done studies on the subject. Content is seriously needed on the page. Though the article is short, and bare bones, it does seem to be neutral, giving links to or citing works that comes from varied places like Europe and America. There are not much information to be cited but all of the links seems to be working well. And all of the sources seems to be creditable and are very up to date.The article itself has no real voice or message and is not part of any Wiki project. Though the article itself does not talk too much about anything, going through some of the links that is given within the article seems to all agree that a utopia is not possible. This matches with the things that have been talked about in class though the theme seems to be different because the articles seem to talk more about human nature and psychology instead of talking about the more tangible things like arable lands and population density. The articles seem to think that a utopia is impossible because of human nature while what we talked about in class seems to point to a more logistical problem when it comes to Utopia's.