User:Natasharintoul/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: Media ownership in Canada
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article because through my various courses taken at SFU I have learned a lot about media ownership. I feel it would be a great starting point to this assignment.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead introduces who governs media ownership in Canada, however it is unclear and the articles topic is not well defined.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead mainly introduces the CRTC and provides a brief definition and background. It does not clearly state the articles major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, however it does not include which information will be in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is not detailed enough and does not provide enough relevant information on the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content of the article is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Content is not up to date. Most information is referring to before 2010.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Up to date content about media concentration in Canada is missing.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Article is neutral since it is hard to form and opinion on this subject, mostly just information.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The information regarding the amount of ownership each company has could potentially form a biased opinion.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No viewpoints are portrayed.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Most facts are backed up with evidence.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources could be much more thorough if they had up to date information.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are slightly outdated
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Some paragraphs are more unclear than others. Some paragraphs could use more explanation.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Very few or no grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Sections could be added in order to add detail and information on further topics. Some sections seem irrelevant and more basic knowledge could be shared.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The comments on the talk page suggest that further research be done in order to clarify some topics.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Article is supported by WikiProjects Canada and was used in Wiki Education Foundation.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This article talks about it in a much more broad and general sense rather than linking it to other specific concepts.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * S status. Lots of room for improvement.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article has relevant information that is clear and backed up by sources.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Article could benefit from further research and detail, as well as being more current and up to date.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is underdeveloped and could use more relevant information to the specific topic.

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: