User:Helenlee321/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Accessible tourism
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead section of the article on accessible tourism provides a good introduction to the major sections as it clearly defines what accessible tourism is and what the concept encompasses, citing Darcy and Dickson (2009). The section is also very concise and not overly detailed. However, since this definition of accessible tourism is over 10 years old, a more up to date definition should be used. In addition, the section doesn’t do any more than introducing the topic itself; it does not clearly present what exactly the article is going to talk about in different sections. Expanding it so that it includes a brief overview of the article would be a way to improve it.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The overall content of the article is directly related to the topic, accessible tourism. It provides an overview of the topic, its history, and some specific examples of accessible tourism. However, it is not hard to notice that some important details are missing. For example, it is stated in the Overview section that, according to the European Network for Accessible Tourism, accessible tourism includes Barrier-free destinations, Transport, High-quality services, Activities, exhibits, & attractions, and Marketing, booking systems, web sites & services. However, the article merely lists these concepts without elaborating on them any further. Similarly, the specific needs and requirements for accessible tourism are also listed without any detailed explanation of what they actually mean. In addition, the Brief History section does not really describe the history of this topic; instead, it gives a very brief description of the current trends of accessible tourism. It is also problematic that the overall content is not up to date, as the majority of the information is more than 10 years old. For example, the demographics of people with disabilities that are used in the article are based on the data released in 2008 and 2011.


 * 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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

Generally, the tone remained neutral throughout the article, and no explicit bias toward a position has been detected. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of or away from a position. The only part that needs improvement in terms of tone is that the descriptions are heavily based on accessible tourism within Europe and do not reflect the global trends of accessible tourism in other parts of the world very well.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The article contains some issues regarding sources and references, and this is the problem that is most discussed in the Talk page as well. While the sources currently used in the article seem reliable and reflect the available literature on the topic, not all of the facts stated in the text are backed up by sources, and thus additional citations are needed. In addition, the majority of the sources are more than 10 years old, and many of the links in the References section do not work.


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The organization of the article also needs some improvements. While the article is broken down into different sections, giving a good overall structure, there are some paragraphs that seem to be out of place. This is particularly noticeable in the Overview section, which talks mainly about the accessible tourism market and funded projects. The third paragraph of the section simply gives the demographics of people with disabilities, and it interrupts the smooth flow of the text. Some readjustments may be needed as we expand the content. No major grammatical or spelling errors were detected.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The article includes a lot of images that show different examples of accessible destinations. While these visual aids can enhance the reader’s understanding of the content, many of the images are quite hard to recognize, and they are not laid out in a visually appealing way. More quality pictures should replace some of them.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

On the Talk page, the major topics of conversations among the editors are about removing copyrighted materials and restoring the external link to the European Network for Accessible Tourism (ENAT) website. Several paragraphs on the article have been removed by the editors because they “appeared to be copyrighted materials.” There are also some debates going on whether or not to restore the external links to ENAT. The Talk page also indicates that the article is part of two projects -- WikiProject Disability and WikiProject Travel and Tourism. In both projects, it is rated Start-class.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall, it seems that the article is incomplete, particularly in terms of its content and references. Expanding the content to include more diverse aspects of the topic and citing more reliable and up-to-date sources would help improve it.


 * 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?

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: