User:Rachelkmoy/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

 * Name of article: Civic technology
 * I chose this article to evaluate because it is the topic of my course, discussing Civic Technology.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The information under Civic Tech in Asian may be underrepresented in related to other global regions. However, this may be an accurate representation of the lack of Civic Technology presence in Asia. Other than this, the viewpoints are not overrepresented or underrepresented.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

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 conversations on this article's talk page mainly consist of fact checking and contributions from research or academic institutions.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a part of several WikiProjects. The projects and its ratings are as follows: WikiProject Technology (Rated Start-class)  WikiProject Politics (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)  WikiProject Sociology (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)  WikiProject Internet (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)  WikiProject Freedom of speech (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)  WikiProject Globalization (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The way Wikipedia discusses this topic differs from the way we have talked about it in class in the sense that Wikipedia offers a more objective, factual account of the topic, as opposed to the discussion based approach we utilize in class, where students are able to offer their insight, opinions, and observations to advance the topic.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's overall status is: Low Importance.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article's strengths are its concise and easily understandable factual approach, which is comprehensively supported.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article is great, I do not have any suggestions for improvement.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article appears to be complete and well-developed.

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: Talk:Civic technology