User:Shadamss/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: Indigenous Intellectual Property
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because of my past interests in intellectual property law, and this heavily relates to our class as indigenous people fight for the right to protect their cultural and intellectual history.

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, the Lead references major parts in the article that can be seen in the contents.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, everything is included in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is very concise.

Lead evaluation
The lead is complete in that it references all of the information found in the article in a general way. My only critique is that there are a lot of examples in the contents and it might be useful to be more specific in the lead about some of the major Indigenous Intellectual Property Claims.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content is up to date and was last edited today.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I do not think that there is content missing other than the fact that there are potentially a lot of cases that are not covered in the article. All of the content that is included, however is relevant to the overall topic.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes the article talks about the struggles of various Indigenous peoples to gain recognition and power over what they consider to be their intellectual property, such as cultural traditions and sites. The article addresses wikipedia's equity gap because Indigenous human rights issues are ignored historically and in current times.

Content evaluation
The article is detailed with specific examples of Indigenous intellectual property disputes. Some sections could be better balanced, such as the first two sections titled, "Traditional Cultural Expressions" and "Organizations working on the issue".

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article is neutral in that it presents the information in an unbiased way and has any opinionated points included as quotes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, the article is just compiling different relevant examples/cases and presenting them in a factual way without apparent added bias.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Yes, the criticism section is very small and only gives a general one-sentence statement about criticism towards the Indigenous intellectual property movement.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The article does not use very persuasive language, however, due to the fact that the critique section is so small, it appears as a one-sided article despite the lack of persuasion/bias in the actual content.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of the article was neutral since everything was very objectively written. There is strong language, but it is the words of the people who are discussed in the article, not an authors opinions.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * All of the facts in the article are supported by citations, however there are a few primary sources. For example, the author references official documents from the United Nations that are primary sources but are also credible. There are also newspapers with topic-relevant events.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, the sources are thorough because the article uses 43 sources with most of them being from academic journals/other sources with extra information. If someone were to read this article and want to learn more about Indigenous intellectual property these sources would be more than enough.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of the articles are from pre-2010 so the information in the article is not very current and could be updated with newer Indigenous rights cases.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes, there are many sources from various different authors. A lot of the material that is referenced is specifically about marginalization and protection of Indigenous communities.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * There are a lot of links that are not working. This could be due to the fact that those are some of the older links from the late 90s-early 2000's.

Sources and references evaluation
This article is in dire need of new/updated sources. There are a lot of broken links, however the majority of the good links are credible. Also, the article could benefit from the inclusion of more recent intellectual property rights for Indigenous peoples.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it is vert easy to read, especially given that intellectual property can often be a challenging subject.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There aren't many grammatical issues.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, the article is well organized, and flows well logically. My only critique is that the "examples" section could potentially be grouped into subcategories to make the table of contents less crowded.

Organization evaluation
The article is clear and concise and its organization does will not confuse the reader. However, the use of subcategories could improve the overall organization drastically.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The images are all relevant to where they are placed, however they are seemingly just for aesthetic purposes and do not add to the information that the article presents.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The captions are sufficiently descriptive, but they are simple because the photos to not need much explanation.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * All of the photos except for one clearly adhere to Wikipedias copyright regulations. The one that is unclear is the last photo in the article, as it shown as being copyrighted.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No, they are awkwardly placed off to the sides of their respective sections.

Images and media evaluation
The images were not very interesting and were also placed in an unappealing manner throughout the article. They do not add much to articles aesthetic.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are 20 threads with most of them being about editing the articles many issues such as formatting, the lack of a criticism section, and a discussion over the necessary amount of declaration examples.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article is rated C-Class and can be found in five WikiProjects including, Anthropology, Indigenous peoples of the Americas, Indigenous peoples of North America, Law, and Human Rights
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't discussed in depth intellectual property in regards to Indigenous human rights. The article does tie into our discussions about the way Indigenous communities have used legal avenues to protect their cultural and historical property.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page has a good amount of discussion with people discussing the articles mistakes and how to change them. The problem is that no-one has talked on the page since 2019.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article has been flagged as needing to be edited. Although it was last edited today, there has been no active discussion on the talk page since 2019.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article is very detailed except for the critique section. The subheadings also flow together in a very natural way.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be improved with better, informative photos and image placement. Some of the links are no longer functioning and need to be updated and I would also recommend placing the examples in the fourth section into subgroups.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * With the exception of the criticism section, the article is well developed as it is clear and concise with relevant citations.

Overall evaluation
Due to the importance of the topic, it is an article that needs to be fixed as soon as possible so that people are not learning outdated information. The article is not terrible and could be fixed relatively easily except for the issue of updating the sources.

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:Indigenous intellectual property