User:PatrickTheveny/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
African Centre for Technology Studies

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I found this article through the academic disciplines filter on Wikipedia, having been drawn to the subject of sustainable development. Given the title of this course, Contemporary African Politics, this seemed like a relevant subject to read into due to the immense potential of development Africa possesses. The specific article I chose through this filter offered an even more focused view on sustainable growth in Africa in particular, as the Africa centre for technology studies is a long-standing non-profit centered in Kenya focused on researching policies that will aid in sustainable development. This matters because the course Africa takes in terms of economic and infrastructure development holds a lot of weight on global climate change minimization efforts, whether that is fair or not. Seeing an organization focused on this issue is encouraging, although I couldn't help but notice the brevity of the article. As you've pointed out in class, wikipedia articles regarding Africa tend to be lacking in overall content.

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.)

In terms of evaluating the quality of the article, I see very few flaws. The lead section is clear and concise, stating the main aspects of the article in a manner that won't lose any readers due to too expansive of a text. Everything covered in the lead section is further explained later on in the article in the sub-sections, and I feel like I know exactly what I'm going to read on about after covering this section. The content is all useful and nothing seems out of place, although the content is not extraordinarily extensive. The topic is fairly niche, though, so there is only so much the authors could write about. Everything they say is attributed to a source through proper citations, although as mentioned above, there are not that many sources as there is not much information included on the page. The articles authors do a good job of using a neutral tone, and just stating the facts regarding the organization, without including any sort of bias towards how they personally feel about the organizations work. All of this information that they are presenting seem to be update, as the organizations mission has seemingly not changed over the years, although I'm not sure the achievement section for the article is fully updated, as the most recent award the non-profit has received according to the wikipedia is from 2013. Updates to the page have been made as recently as 2013, though, which is encouraging. There is no media or images on the page, which does make it a bit bland, although the topic is not really one that lends itself well to this type of content. Overall I think the article is sufficient for the topic at hand, although it is certainly a brief article. The writing quality and tone is good, and it seems as if the collaborations on the article have been useful. I think this is a good, albeit short, wikipedia page detailing an interesting non-profit.