User:Ghodsonuo/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Ethical consumerism


 * Article Evaluation
 * Most of the article appeared relevant and on-topic, but some sections (such as the final part of the introduction, and the section titled "Research") contained material that was tangentially related at best.
 * The tone of the article was largely neutral, but there were deluges into opinionated territory on several occasions.
 * On the whole, this is a very rough article - even if its lengthy list of citations suggests otherwise.


 * Sources
 * Claims were often made without citation throughout the article. Certain sections were particularly offensive in this regard, and make it obvious which additions were made by unscrupulous editors.
 * The sources cited vary in reliability considerably, as the few scholarly articles and accredited news sources were outweighed by blogs, political newspapers, and other questionable sites.

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Anti-consumerism


 * Article Evaluation
 * Most information in the article is relevant - although the sentence under the heading "Austrian economics" is so under-contextualized that I would remove it.
 * The writing is clearly biased. Criticism of anti-consumerism is noted as existing, and largely goes unexplained. The slant across the article is in favor of anti-consumerism.


 * Sources
 * Huge sections of the article go uncited - and other editors have noted this, flagging the article for it.
 * Most sources listed seem to be fine, although some don't appear to be accessible.

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Consumer activism


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article's content is largely relevant, though the section titled "Celebrity endorsements" is not useful and does not sufficiently add to the article. As a side-note, the images used are wholly ineffective for this topic.
 * The content of this article is not neutral. It is heavily skewed towards a positive assessment of consumer activism. Even its "Criticisms" sections fails to provide counterbalance, as critical perspectives are only acknowledged as existing, given a superficial explanation, and then invalidated by criticism of the critics.


 * Sources
 * Claims are frequently cited throughout. This article does not suffer from undercitation.
 * However, the reliability of the sources is a point of contention. Many come from news sources that simply cannot be described as neutral.

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Consumer protection


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article is written from a bird's eye view, and all information seems to be relevant and neutral. However, there is a substantial lack of depth because of this approach.


 * Sources
 * Certain parts of the article could be cited more thoroughly, but the bulk is well enough cited.
 * The sources are mostly directly related to law and constitutional provisions. Thus, they aren't exactly scholarly, but I think it is okay here.

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Consumer behavior


 * Article Evaluation
 * The article appears to stay on-topic with relevant information throughout. The tone seems to be neutral, though I find it curious that a topic which emphasizes ethnography would be without a criticisms section.


 * Sources
 * There is thorough citing in this article, with a huge number of notes. The reliability appears to be good, but I am not entirely familiar with what sources would be appropriate for a more psychology-oriented piece. Some sources, though, come from websites that do not strike me as particularly scholarly (such as business.com).