User:Books&coffee/Evaluate an Article

(1) Which article are you evaluating?
Presentence investigation report

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article for my English class, which focuses on genres as tools for social change. We are interested in studying the presentence investigation report because of the critical role it plays in the criminal justice system, while also considering its inconsistencies. Many aspects of the genre, from its style to the core information it contains, have evolved over time and affected the role of the report in the sentencing process. As a class, we are working to improve this article.

Evaluate the article
The lead section did not provide a concise, clear definition of the presentence investigation report. After reading it, I was still uncertain about the intended role of this type of report and what the Wikipedia article would focus on.

The content of the article does not seem reliable, because there are many places in which information is not cited. There are only 13 sources used in the article. There is a heavy emphasis on reference 1, Caren Converse's article, which looks as the presentence investigation report through the lens of genre studies. While this is a useful perspective to include, the more prominent sources should be more objective, definition-oriented sources.

Additionally, the organization of information was good, but there should be a stronger emphasis on some sections of the article. For example, Purpose should be emphasized more strongly relative to Preparation. It would also be interesting to include information on how the report has evolved over time.

Some issues being discussed on the Talk page include the lack of updated, relevant, objective sources, as well as comments on improving the Lead section in order to make it more coherent.

Overall, the article does well to provide an overview of how the presentence investigation report is prepared, but needs to organize the information more coherently and include more, updated sources.

(2) Which article are you evaluating?
Encyclopedia

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I also chose this article to evaluate as a part of my English class, Writing Genres for Social Action. We recently did some literature review on the history of the encyclopedia, and how it relates to the evolution of Wikipedia.

Evaluate the article
The lead section was clear and concise, and provided a thorough overview of what would be covered in the article.

The content was well-organized. They provided several useful sections, including a brief history of the encyclopedia, and the etymology of the word. I did notice that information on contributors to encyclopedias was not included or emphasized, which surprised me. Although they mentioned some famous encyclopedia authors, they neglected to mention lesser-known contributors and their motivations.

The image of the Encyclopedia Britannica volumes did not align with the caption, which stated that the volumes filled two bookcases. The image actually shown was 2 shelves of a bookcase.

There's a lot of discussion on the Talk page, some of which is unsigned and non-sensical. Some grammatical suggestions were made, and there also seems to be some discrepancy about the actual etymology of the word 'encyclopedia.'

There are 21 sources, indicating that a wealth of information supports the article.