User:Grace.musser18/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
Topic Name: People-centered development

I chose this article because I am very interested in sustainability and people-centered development; I wanted to compare my knowledge with the information on Wikipedia.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think it concisely describes

Lead evaluation
The Lead's introductory sentence, in my opinion, does a better job than the rest of the article at defining the topic; it covers relevant points necessary to understand the topic. It does not however, go into enough detail in the Lead. I would add more information on international development in general and just go into a bit more explanatory detail. For example, the Lead includes information on economic growth as a tactic of development but within the article barely references this integral point. The current Lead is like a thesis statement - it does a great job at briefly summarizing the article, but it could use a little more information to better help the reader understand the topic's significance.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The content of the article is relevant, but it is also extremely limited, referencing people-centered development in the 1980s-90s and no more recently. It also focuses on the man who came up with the term "people-centered development," David Korten. The article heavily focuses on Korten and his contributions without mention of those who have improved and built upon his ideas to promote people-centered development. Additionally, the article fails to include information on theories of development, which this is. The theory needs to be put into context better and expanded upon because currently, the article does not give a full, fair picture of people-centered development in 2020, let alone the 2000s. Also, the article heavily references government and government programs as producers of change, when people-centered development itself focuses less on government and more on communities developing in ways suitable to their respective values.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
I would say the article is neutral in the ways it speaks about the topic, but in just presenting certain information, it does show bias in its heavy focus on David Korten, over-representing his contributions. The scope of the content is very limited, and and puts this irrelevant man at the center rather than applications of this theory.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All links are valid & active, and the page does a good job of using and citing sources. The sources are not at all current (mostly from the 1990s), but that does indeed reflect the content of the article.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is presented in a way that makes the idea understandable to the average person. I like the way it breaks down certain points, like participation and justice, but I wish that had been done for all of the sub-topics. I also think there's not as much to say here because of the small amount of information in the article. I didn't notice any grammatical/spelling errors, and the writing is well-executed.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
No images or media. N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
There is very little on the talk page. The last edit was in August 2016, and the article hasn't yet been rated on the quality scale nor the importance scale. The page is part of WikiProject International development (a semi-active WikiProject). WikiProject International Development. The project's goal is to provide comprehensive information about international development in terms of relevant social, technical, and economic issues, so it is a more limited view than we look at development in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
I was disappointed with the very limited information provided in the article, but the information provided was indeed comprehensive. I think the article needs a more thorough outline that puts this sustainable development theory into context. I would categorize the article as underdeveloped because with some more research and work, it could be much more representative and extensive.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: Talk:People-centered development