User:Amla57pu/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (Information privacy)


 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

-This article on information privacy is assigned this week in order to give us the foundational tools needed to evaluate more content later down the line.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

-Yes, the introductory sentence provides a clear description of the articles topic.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

-The lead does not seem to include a description of the major section as it seems there are many aspect to the information privacy topic not allowing for there to be one.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

-The lead does mention subtopics and overarching themes when it some to the issue of information privacy and while relevant they aren't fully explore in this specific article.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

-The lead seems to be concise in addressing and further expansing later in the article on information privacy.

Lead evaluation

 * The lead is a well written description on the topic at hand, giving an understandable explanation on the topic and what it is. It is informative and to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

-The article's content is relevant to the topic as it convert further into other aspects of information privacy.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

-The content is up to date with the it's most recent update set at August 17th of this year.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

-All content seems to belong in the article as it seems relevant to one another and there doesn't seem to be content missing.


 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

-The article doesn't seem to show equity gaps nor does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations.

Content evaluation

 * The content reflects the overarching topic well as all information is relevant and up to date.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?

-While the article does present information that is relevant there seems to be some skew to one side of information privacy.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

-Some claims, in the way they are written seem to lean towards a biased position.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

-There seems to be some viewpoints overrepresented in this article.


 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

-This article seems to paint a picture to pursued the reader towards one position on information privacy.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone and position of the article are heavily structure with information privacy and the way it is used against individuals and while it is important to outline implications as dictated by the information presented it is important to outline factual information as well and because of the overwhelming information geared on one side, one might get the impression that they should trust no source and that there are only negative consequences in respect to information privacy.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

-There are some areas of the text in which some facts aren't backed up by secondary sources.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

-Yes sources are thorough and come from a wide scope of available material on the topic.


 * Are the sources current?

-For the most part sources are current.


 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

-The sources do seem to come from a diverse spectrum of authors but there is nothing particularly signaling towards the use of sources from historically marginalized individuals.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

-The links for sources do seem to work.

Sources and references evaluation
In some parts of the article there seems to be information written in which it seems unclear where they got those facts so it is important to go back and figure out where that information cam from. Although the sources do show some sense of variety and relevancy.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

-This article is an easy and understandable read, it is clear and concise in outlining the points its trying to make and doesn't flip flop too much.


 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

-After reviewing it there seems to be no grammatical errors.


 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

-Yes the article is well organized with its sections reflecting major points of the topic.

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article is clear and structured fairly well although there is definitely more information that could be presented.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

-No image appears on the article


 * Are images well-captioned?

-No image appears on the article


 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

-No image appears on the article


 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

-No image appears on the article

Images and media evaluation
No image appears on the article meaning there could be room to include some.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

-The conversations are based on suggestions, some links being modified, and some on merging with other type of privacy concerns.


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

-This article has a C rating on its computing, internet, and has surveillance WikiProjects.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

-This article shows the complexity of information privacy something that we've briefly discussed as there are many subtopics and aspects to consider under this overarching topic.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is really mostly about the changes being made which shows the work in progress this article is under which will hopefully strengthen its rating further down the line.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?

-This article is in some terms useful but should be used with caution.


 * What are the article's strengths?

-The way it's written is easy to follow and there is no fluff around it writing quality.


 * How can the article be improved?

-There needs to be more factual evidence presented on the topic to give a more neutral viewpoint.


 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

-This article is only some what developed and needs to be worked on for neutrality purposes and to give an even better scope of the topic.

Overall evaluation
The article starts strong and has a lot of potential to be formulated better. It is helpful to some extent but once more information is provided it can give readers a better understanding of the topic.