User:AdubofourGh/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)Language proficiency

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

The article is relevant to me because it falls within my line of study and research. It also has notability in how it has been sufficiently covered in the literature.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)


 * 1) The lead does not fully cover salient parts of the discourse on the topic, and it does not fully represent everything it discusses on the topic or what has to be discussed on the topic.
 * 2) For the content, there appears to be a neglect on representation of the topic from educational and research perspectives and could use contributions in those details. Also, the section on the difficulties of defining language proficiency does not do to the goal of that section. Further, the discussion on how proficiency is developed takes a one-sided look at it from the perspective of acquisition than learning. Finally, new sections could be added to the article to broaden the areas the articles touches on the topic.
 * 3) For sources and references, the first problem with the article is that the citations are inadequate which leads into the second problem that not every relevant claim in it is supported with a reference. A general weighting of the nature of sources listed do not fully align with the topic's interest. For instance, it is difficult to find how the first citation in the reference list - "Wayback Machine" - connects with language proficiency.
 * 4) The organization of the article needs revision because, as it has been pointed out earlier, certain important sub-headings may be needed to improve the article by giving representation to various facets of the topic.
 * 5) No images and media are incorporated in the article. Some relevant images and media could be incorporated.

Feedback from Vetter
Hello - Great work on this article evaluation of [Language proficiency]. I think it's a perfect candidate to work on for this assignment because of how closely connected it is to your reseach area as well as because of the obvious developmental needs it demonstrates. In addition to the issues you've pointed out in terms of the lead, content, missing references, and organization, there also seems to be a gap in terms of how standards related to language proficiency have been used to discriminate or otherwise withhold goods/services/opportunities from people. That may not be a direction you want to go in here, and there are certainly other opportunities for improvement, but it's certainly worth thinking over.

Just keep in mind that you don't need to take the article to any kind of "final verrsion" - the assignment requirements are

Minimum of 4 references cited and added to Wikipedia article Minimum of 300 words added to Wikipedia article

So really you could focus on 1-2 of the tasks you've mentioned. Finally, about the "wayback machine" - this is actually the Internet Archive (https://archive.org/) which creates an archive of pages on the Internet. Often, when the original page is no longer hosted, editors will use an archived copy. In this case, the archived source isn't really a great one (looks like someone's personal blog rather than a published article). So it should eventually be replaced with something more scholarly.

Hope this helps! I'm excited to see what you will do with this article. Keep in mind that a draft of your edits is due on Oct. 4.

-DarthVetter (talk) 14:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)