User:ChrisDeClou/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Sociotechnology

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose to evaluate this article because society/social media/communication go hand-in-hand with technology today, so I wanted to know if sociotechnology covered this.

Evaluate the article
Evaluating Content

'''Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?'''

The article is relevant to the topic. Nothing in particular distracted me. However, I thought there could have been a better example of sociotechnology than the "bridge being built" example that was given. Although the article is on topic, it does not go into great detail about what sociotechnology is. The introduction gives rudimentary description of sociotechnology, and breaks down its subheadings within the article, however the article does not do a great job of connecting society to technology, which, in a sense, is what sociotechnology is. Nothing in the article distracted me, as everything remained on topic, but nothing drew my attention for that matter. The portion of the article that describes sociotechnology seems like more of an introduction rather than the crux of the article. The subheadings and topics do a good job tying itself to the article, however they could also use more information to back itself up.

'''Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?'''

There is no information that is out of date but there is information that can definitely be added. The article doesn't give an overview of the principles behind sociotechnology, nor does the article give you the full names of the scholars who came up with sociotechnology, only their last names outside of Mario Bunge. Without the full names of the scholars, it makes it harder to do more research. In terms of what could be added, I think the author could have added more information about the scholars, how sociotechnology came about, and where sociotechnology is headed.

'''Can you identify any noticeable equity gaps? Does the article under-represent or misrepresent historically marginalized populations?'''

There are no equity gaps or any mis/under-representations or historically marginalized populations, however the article could have gone into more detail about how the advancement of sociotechnology, or lack thereof, effects/effected underdeveloped countries. It does not misrepresent populations.

What else could be improved?

I believe the history of sociotechnology could be further explained. It says who came up with it, but not the history behind sociotechnology. I also think the author could have discussed where sociotechnology is predicted to trend towards in the future, as well as do a better job connecting it's body to the subject. For example, specifically tying business, communication, robots, etc. to what sociotech. actually is. Somebody did comment on the talk page, stating that this is a broad, but relevant topic, yet short in length. This article is a part of 3 projects: Wikiproject Sociology, Wikiproject Technology, and Wikiproject Systems. This differs from what we have discussed in class because our discussions on topics are much more in depth and descriptive. This was a short wiki page. It had important information, but it could have been better expanded upon.

Evaluating Tone

'''Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear to be heavily biased toward a particular position?'''

The article is neutral. Some of the information is opinion based and has no link to where a study was conducted. For example, they mention "people care more about materialistic things than the negative influences they have created in human morals and education. For example, it is more important for people to know words to songs than to remember things for their test." There's no definitive proof provided.

Are there viewpoints that are over-represented or under-represented?

Again, the article could have tied the advancement or lack thereof of underdeveloped societies and its relation to technology, or where sociotechnology is trending based on the facts or research provided by scholars. Nothing in particular was under or over-represented, however.

Evaluating Sources

'''Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?'''

Yes, the citations work and support most of the claims in the article, minus the portion of the article that appears to be opinion-based (as stated in the first question). The links all support the claims in the article and is cited as such.

'''Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noticed?'''

As you continue to scroll through the article, the article begins to have less references tagged within itself, posting a lot of information without giving the proper credit to source. I would not say bias is noticed, but there is an opinionated statement made, as I pointed out earlier.

Do the sources come from a diverse array of authors and publications?

There are 6 different sources; so, yes, the sources come from an array of authors and publications. The author also added extra reading so one could do more research. However, since I believe more information overall needed to the article, which, in turn, would require more sources, authors, and publications.