User:Mbagri/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
African Centre for Technology Studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because the intersection of technology and policy always interests me, especially in how it relates to nations outside of the United States. After a preliminary reading of the article, I found that it was a good source if someone is looking to get introductory information on the Centre for Technology Studies. I also didn't know what the African Centre for Technology Studies was, so I thought it would be good to read up and get information on something I haven't heard much of.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead Section


 * The lead section for this article nicely introduces the topic that it is covering, and sets up the rest of the article well. It could do better in briefly describing which sections the article will cover, because it does not share any information beyond the introduction to the ACTS. There is no information that isn't covered in the article that follows, and the paragraph is very to the point.

Content


 * This article touches on some very relevant topics related to the ACTS. They range from its history, affiliations, awards, community-based actions, and selected publications.
 * Although relevant, each subsection of the article is fairly short and only touches on the surface of the topics that they cover. However, I think for a subject as niche as the ACTS, this is probably accurate in representation. The article could do better in having more in-depth information about the affiliations of the ACTS, and how these have affected the Centre's work. Also, expanding on the community-based actions as well as selected publications with supporting examples and information would make those sections and the article at large stronger.
 * Being a NGO based around the mission to make development in African countries more sustainable through policy and technology, the ACTS article does address minorities and underrepresented nations in the world.
 * In all, there needs, to overall be more information presented for readers to understand what the ACTS is, and what it does accurately, etc.

Tone


 * The tone of the article is neutral, and all information is presented in a clear and unbiased method. The article does not really include any information that could be considered controversial or open to interpretation; rather, it is mostly a regurgitation of facts.

Sources and References


 * There are a good amount of sources that the article draws upon for its information. All information is aptly cited and contributors given reference to.
 * Many of the sources come from the same few authors and publications. I believe this could have something to do with 1) the shorter length of the article, and 2) the fact that the ACTS is a very niche topic to cover, that may not have a lot of literature written about it. However, sustainable development in Africa is a pretty major topic, and information thus could draw on more resources, which would make the article more reliable.

Organization and Writing Quality


 * The writing quality is very good, and the article is composed well. Each section is concisely written, and although short, do a great job aptly describing the subject matter.

Talk Page Discussion


 * There is no talk page discussion for this article
 * It is rated as Start-Class, and is a part of the WikiProject Africa. There is no quality scale for the article, but it is supported by WikiProject Kenya which has a low importance rating.

Overall impressions


 * Overall, this article is off to a good start. The foundation for a strong article has been set by the information has already been provided, and now all that is needed to do is to fill in the content gaps on this page.
 * The tone and writing style of the article are some of its strong suits, but it is definitely lacking in reliability and variety of sources.
 * It is definitely an underdeveloped article, but one that has a promising outlook, should it receive a high importance rating.