User:Imtoophat/sandbox

2/17/2017

I chose the article called "Dark Data". I personally thought the article was very informative. The article had well cited references and the information was very concise. This made it very easy to understand the material it was talking about. The way the article was structured with each different category very succinct and easy to understand. For the most part, the material covered in this article is relevant to the topic this Wikipedia page is talking about. I was not distracted while I was reading this article. This article is very neutral. Due to the amount of unknown information about this topic, the article states many research information about this subject which makes it very neutral and not heavily biased toward one side or the other. The citations work and are very reliable. The sources are not inherently biased. This topic is fairly new and thus the information is very up to date with the current times.

Each section is detailed very carefully. I can clearly tell that whoever wrote this article tried their very best to remain as neutral as possible. By referencing facts and sources from numerous, credible locations, this makes this Wikipedia page extremely powerful in terms of scrolling down to find credible sources as well as get a very good sense of what "Dark Data" is about. Personally, I especially love the fact that this article has very few sections because, normally, when I look to another Wikipedia page, there are a ton of sections and can be quite overwhelming. I usually have a very hard time pinpointing the exact information I am looking for. Each section has sub-sections, numerous citations, and many words which can be too much for the client to handle at once. Besides the brevity, something I do not like about this is that, although it is very unbiased, it is somewhat very general. It does not go into too much detail about this subject. Despite the fact that the user can understand what the article is saying, it's very broad and using this for specific research purposes is highly not recommended. I applaud that this article is simple and easy to understand.

Overall, I, indeed, do think this is a good article to read if the client wants to get a gist of what "Dark Data" is all about. It has fantastic sources, is very understandable, succinct, and does not cause too much stress in terms of the amount of information the article presents. However, I do not recommend this for specific research purposes due to its broadness. However, I do think the sources are fantastic and should be looked into if one is trying to do more research into "Dark Data".

~