User:Madimacdonald/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: Incarceration in Canada(link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate
 * I have chosen this article to evaluate because it is a brief topic that I think will be discussed all throughout this class. Incarceration in Canada is also a subject that is based heavily on colonialist views, and so I thought it would be interesting to evaluate this article as I suspect it will be biased toward a colonial system.

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?

Lead evaluation
The introductory sentence of this article clearly defines what they mean when discussing incarceration in Canada. The definition that the writer(s) of the article provides is very concise, in that it is brief yet insightful, giving the reader a clear understanding of what the article is about. The tone of the lead sentence is very matter of fact. However, after the first sentence, the lead is not as insightful and organized. The lead fails to outline what the article's major sections are. Rather, it talks about statistic rates, the YCJA, and the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in the prison system. Whereas, the article's major sections are the history of incarceration, the division of federal and provincial, and security levels. Therefore, the lead of the article is not concise; after the first sentence it loses organization.

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

Content evaluation
The contents of the article are relevant to the topic, however there are a lot of other important topics when discussing incarceration in Canada that I believe were missed out on. I think the lead is 'misleading' on what is to be discussed in the article, and so it is evident when topics such as the YCJA, incarceration rates, and over-representation of Indigenous peoples are not further discussed that it is missing in the article. I do think that this topic addresses topics related to historically underrepresented populations (Indigenous peoples), mentioning them in two parts of the article and raising awareness to the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in the prison system. The article also discusses the use of healing lodges that the Correctional Service of Canada has provided for Indigenous inmates, however only a limited number of Indigenous peoples are able to use these (minimum security inmates), and there is a limited number of healing lodges available to those inmates. The article seems to glamorize prison life for Indigenous people, referring to "special living units" for these peoples, where they can practice and are taught about spirituality, philosophy, and principles, however prison itself is a colonial system and so describing prison this way for Indigenous peoples can be dangerous in the picture it paints. A positive thing about this article is that the content does have statistics involved from 2020, therefore I would argue that it is up to date.

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 do think this article is generally neutral, perhaps being the reason they do not go into much discussion of topics that could easily come off as biased and instead only stick to statistical and basic, common-known information. Their choice of content for this article is content that would be hard to challenge as being opinionated as they stick to factual information such as the history and startup of the incarceration system in Canada, as well as the division between provincial and federal and how it is decided which prisoner goes well, and what each security level looks like. However, it is evident that this article is written from colonial sources, and although it is not outright biassed against a certain group but there are subtle undertones. Given this, I would say this article is trying to be neutral, but given the subject being dominated by colonialism it is challenging to do so. This article can do better.

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?
 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
All of the information in this source is backed up by reliable secondary sources. These secondary sources do provide the necessary information for a concise and detailed article. However, all these sources are from the government of Canada website. Although, they may have different authors it makes it clear that these sources are from a very colonial perspective, and do not provide the facts that historically marginalized communities (Indigenous peoples) know to be true. As well, they do not offer a wide range of variety. These sources are good for providing the factual evidence needed in the article, however, I do think that the writer(s) could have used more variety in their authors to create a more fairly represented article. All of the links do work.

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 concise and clearly written. There is information in the lead that maybe would have been more beneficial in their own place in the article and outside of the lead. Therefore, I would argue that the lead could have been more concise and to the point, as well as focus more on what the rest of the article consisted of. The rest of the article after the lead was organized, in their separate contents, and included concise information with no extraneous information. The article is also free of spelling errors and grammatical errors making it a smooth read.

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
This article provides no images for the reader.

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 are no conversations going on in the talk pages of this article. The last time the talk page was edited was in 2015. The article is part of the WikiProject Canada as well as the WikiProject Law Enforcement, however it is rated of low importance in both projects. On the quality scale it is rated at "start 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
The articles strengths are providing factual information that is mostly neutral. This article can be improved upon by rewriting the lead so that it sets the tone for the rest of the article and really allows the reader to know what they are about to read. The choice of sources can also be more diverse, rather than all coming from the government of Canada's website, as this gives the article a colonial vantage point. I would argue that the article is underdeveloped as Incarceration in Canada is such a broad topic and there are only few topics related to this subject that are represented in the article.

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: