User:Lheiler02/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: Social shaping of technology.    Renewable energy law
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I choose this article because in class we talked about how technology influence society overtime. We talked ablout the pros and cons of it so I thought this article related to class.  I thought it look interesting and it looks like it needs a lot of work to be done on it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * Yes the article clearly states what the topic is and what it is about. The article does have links to sections reating to the topic. The article itself does not have a ton of information on it. The lead does not include information that is not present in an article. The lead is not is not overly detailed and includes helpful examples to better understand the topic.

The lead is a little short and only briefly describes what the law is. It does not say anything about the article major sections. The lead does include some details like the type of energy that can be considered renewable but does not go into detail.
 * 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 * The articles content is relevant to the topic but it does seem to be a little out of date because a lot of the articles used are from at least 10 years ago. Technology has become more influencial do the article should be up to date more. All the content belongs. No the article does not deal with equity gaps.

Most of the content present in the article is incomplete with only the titles and maybe one sentence. There is a lot of content missing within the article.
 * 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
 * Yes, the tone is neutral. The article explains how technology influence can be bad and good. The examples given in the article show the pros and cons of things like and iPhone. No the article does not persuade the reader one way or another.

The tone does seem to have a neutral tone with no biased towards one particular sides. The article does not go into discussing viewpoints.
 * 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
 * All the facts are backed up but some of the sources are hard to find. The ones I was able to click on seemed relevant to the topic. Some of the sources are not current and can be traced back all the to the 90s which was more than 20 years ago. There are only four sources so there could be more and the article could be more diverse. The links do work and lead to a source. Most of then are other wiki pages.

Most of the information is backed up within the article connecting to another wikipedia article but has no body paragraph attached to it. There are sources available and the links to work within the sources.
 * 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 article can be read easily and is clear. I did not see and grammatical or spelling errors within the article. There's only one major section but it explains the topic well.

The article has a lot of headings but not a lot of information is given inside those heading. It could definitely go into depth more. I feel some of the heading are also unnecessary within the article.
 * 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
 * There are no images on this article just a link leading to relating topics.

There are no images within the article called renewable resourses
 * 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
 * There is a discussion about the article being redundant and one particular user kept arguing with other editors and reverting the article back to what ever was previously there before. The article is rated mid-importance and is related to three Wikiprojects. The WikiProjects it is related to is Sociology, history of science and technology. This article talks about the history technology has had on people overtime. While in class we talked on how technology is affecting society now.

There are no discussion happening in the article.
 * 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
 * The article is in it's beginning phases and needs to be further edited and include more details about the topic overtime. The strengths is that it has a good opening paragraph and includes facts and relative sources. The article can be expanded more and give more information about the topic now. The article is well-developed but definitely more information can be added. One of the comments said the article should be merged and I feel that would be better suited for this article.

It needs a lot of work and more information needs to be added. the overall status is started.
 * 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: