User:Eastyorkzoo129/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
I am evaluating a C-class article of "low importance" in the Libraries WikiProject about digital curation.

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it is a C-class and fits the description of articles I could evaluate for this assignment. Over the summer, I was a research intern in a digital humanities program and we learned a lot about digital curation, library science, and how digital curation can be a part of an archiving job. Since this is related to the field I want to work in after graduating and it applies to digital writing, I thought it would be interesting to evaluate for this preparation assignment so my practice writing on Wikipedia starts to focus more on what I'd like to do my work on in a thematic sense. This article is about digital preservation and maintenance, which are both applicable to digital writing as concerns. My preliminary impression is that it was written by someone who works in library and information sciences because it has a lot of the same content I learned over the summer. It is structured almost like a deconstructed PowerPoint, as it covers the "pillars" of digital curation as well as some challenges facing the practice.

Evaluate the article
The lead section of this page is well-cited and concise as it provides a solid definition and scope of digital preservation. The introducing sentence defines the field and the following few sentences describe major points such as the purpose, personnel, and subgroups of work of digital curation. Content within this article is relevant to the field, as it answers a lot of questions that one might have when introduced to the topic in a course or through their job, such as challenges facing the practice or key components of performing curation well. It is up-to-date, as most of the sources are from the last few years, likely due to the fact that digital preservation is an emerging field made possible by the Digital Revolution. Something to include may be institutions or individuals who first started practicing or coining the term "digital curation," so that the history of the field is more fully described other than the language used to describe it (in the Word History section). It is as neutral as can be for an academic-sounding article. Nothing is being persuaded, other than the concept that digital curation is an increasingly necessary practice for digital entities to consider engaging with for preservation and security purposes. The first half of the article, including the lead section, Word History, and Challenges (up through Digitization of Analog Materials) is well-cited and has citations for nearly each point, but only half of these are peer-reviewed or from a neutral source. The majority of the other sources are from academic centers or academics within the field who offer their descriptions, definitions, or insights into the field, and this skews the article to reflect the beliefs surrounding the practice to the few who have published about it or work in a field that actively engages with its scholarship. The second half, including the Approaches section and the last few subsections, have markers where citations are needed. It is unclear if minority writers are included. Most of the links in the citations work. The article is well-written, as it sounds like an academic description of the field, but the structure is odd. The section where the materials are listed is in-complete and looks bad. The logical structure flows, though, since the authors of the page started with facts about digital curation and then moved to discuss its challenges. I would move the Approaches section to follow the Word History and Methodology Sections in order to talk about concepts before discussing challenges, especially for readers who aren't already aware of the field. No images are used, but there should be logos of centers working on this, scholars who are leading this field, and pictures of the materials commonly curated. The only thread in the Talk section is a user who asked "What is curating" with no accompanying comment. Clearly, this page needs work, as it was likely written by two or three academics within the field and has basically no community to check its content, organization, or appeal. It is rated a C-class article of low importance in the Libraries WikiProject, and also belongs within Digital Preservation and Collections Care WikiProjects. The status of this is somewhere between complete and incomplete because a lot of important content is covered, but the structure is not conducive to its purpose, citations are needed for a large portion of the article, and there images need to be added to the page.