User:Pancake8/sandbox/Lucia Liu

Article Evaluation #1

Lead content:

The lead section is pretty concise. It gave a detailed definition of information privacy and its synonyms. And it states the related fields for the keyword.

Content:

I like the way that it categorizes the information by information types. However I think the categorization could be more concise and more parts to add as well. I like how it links a main article with every information type but not every type has an article. This could be improved as well. Also I agree with David that more countries except for US could be discussed as cases.

Tone and Balance:

Overall the tone is pretty neutral and didn't show a preference on any directions. However I think that the word choices could be improved and some are not written language. For example, "On the internet many users give away a lot of information about themselves" This sentence is a bit redundant in my opinion.

Source and References:

I like the sources of the article. They are not from a single author or institution. But source variety could be improved by looking for sources from other countries other than US and Europe Union. Also it's seen that the articles were mostly published before 2018. We could find more up to date sources.

Organization and writing quality:

As discussed above, although most part is professional and formal some could still change.

Images and Media:

This part is definitely something to improve on with the article as it has neither image nor media.

Talk page discussion:

This could be rated as a C class article.

Overall Impressions:

I like the article as it gives an amount of pretty comprehensive information about information privacy. However the categorization could be more concised.

Article Evaluation #2 https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/信息安全

Lead content:

I think this article has a more complicated lead content but it indeed has everything that's needed.

Content:

Compared with the English article, the content for the Chinese article has a lot missing. The history of information privacy is too concise that it only includes the beginning and the ending. And that it has no case studies at all.

Tone and Balance:

Overall the tone is pretty neutral and didn't show a preference on any directions.

Source and References:

The source is unreliable that it only has one single author and less than 10 sources.

Organization and writing quality:

The writing quality is unprofessional in that there are grammar mistakes. The flow of writing is unclear.

Images and Media:

There are two images in this article but it's hard to relate them with the articles without any explanation.s

Talk page discussion:

This article could not be rated into any class type.

Overall Impressions:

Overall the content is strongly lacking for this article and the organization is bad. A lot could be added into the content.