User:Danisalv/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
The article I am evaluating is the Dark web.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
The dark web is something that I've heard mentioned a lot. I have never heard enough concrete information about it for me to understand it fully. I have a lot of questions about the dark web that I hope I can learn from editing the Wiki page.

= Evaluating content =
 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * There is constant talk about how the dark web is different from the deep web.
 * The fraud section is a bit confusing. Expand what type of fraud may be in the dark web. Is this a space where everyone is black and white about what services they want to provide
 * Phishing scams don't have to have their own section. Can be placed in a section talking about the legal and illegal activities.
 * The section about puzzles was also confusing, more explanation to what it is actually about.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * Can add:
 * How is the dark web being funded? Who created it and currently has some control over it?
 * How is the government interacting with the dark web? Are there regulations put in place to limit access to it?
 * How social media views the dark web. Are there any social media platforms that have connections to the dark web?
 * How do media and news outlets portray the dark web? What is their bias of it?
 * What is true and untrue about the rumors about the dark web.
 * Can you identify any notable equity gaps? Does the article underrepresent or misrepresent historically marginalized populations?
 * There is no talk of historically marginalized people.
 * What else could be improved?
 * Expand section about terrorism and its communication in the dark web.
 * Mostly just expanding on what types of activities goes on in the dark web.
 * More information about who uses the site and makes up its forums.
 * Why people go to the dark web in the first place. ==

= Evaluating tone =
 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * This article is mostly neutral. This area of the internet is made up largely of illegal activities. Nothing is condoned or approached as if the dark web is benefitting or harming society.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Many of the viewpoints are about illegal actions taking place within the dark web. There is a possibility that there are legal actions taking place that use the dark web in a positive way. Everyone always assumes that it is illegal and evil. ==

= Evaluating sources =
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Many of the sources linked to the article are functioning and are accurately phrased.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Many of the sources are not from reliable references due to the lack of journals, scholarly articles, and peer reviewed sources. Many sources used come from journalism websites that are either well known, such as BBC News, but others reference some low ranking sites.
 * Because they cite popular news outlets, each news outlet has its own bias.
 * Do the sources come from a diverse array of authors and publications?
 * There is a large array of sources, however, many used the same articles for their reference points. ==

= Checking the talk page =
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Like the article itself, the talk page keeps bringing up the discussion about what separates the dark web from the deep web.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as a C-Class article.
 * It is apart of the crime, internet, internet culture, and law Wikiprojects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * So far we have not discussed the Dark Web in class, however, I assume that what we would discuss about it in class would be about how it is used and whether or not it is a benefit or danger to the free internet. ==

Organization and writing quality

 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article has some overlapping information that keeps being brought up, however, its organization is about average and is easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * After putting the article through a spelling and grammar check there are little to no grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The subsections are a little messy in organization, however, they can easily be put in order of which section has the most important information to the least important in regards to how muc it effects the dark web. ==

Lead section
A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.


 * Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Introductory sentence properly explains what type of service the Dark Web is and how to reach it.
 * Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Lead has a table of contents that shows the outline of the article. There is no text description of what the article fully entails.
 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
 * The lead doesn't have information that is not specified in the article, however, much of the information in the lead is very specific to only a few section.
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is short and overly detailed with information that pertains to one subsection of the article. Even though this subsection is important to the article, it can be a little more broader in detail and more concise. ==

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall this article has good bones to expand upon. There are sections that are titled but don't have a lot of information within them.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * This article knows how the dark web is different from the deep web. They emphasize it throughout the article and they understand what type of community is connected with the dark web.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The information in the subsections needs to be expanded instead of just being mentioned. There is a lot more information than just knowing what types of sites and softwares can connect you to the dark web. You need to know what the benefits and drawback of the dark web are and how it has been affecting people within and outside of the virtual world.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I would say the the structure is pretty well developed, but the content is very underdeveloped.  ==

Images and Media

 * There are no images included in this article at all. The only content included besides the text are two graphs that date back to 2015 and 2016 that need to be updated.  ==