User:Sphub/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: Digitization
 * Our class focuses on privacy and reputation in the modern era of the internet and digital technology. I felt that the process of digitizing information and it's security is a part of the general topic that we discuss in our class.

Lead

 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the term digitization is defined concisely in the first sentence.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead doesn't represent some of the larger sections of the article, It's more of an in depth description and a comment about it's use compared to analog which I don't think really fits in the Lead
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, The only thing that might be considered that is the mentioning that digital data can, "in theory, be propagated indefinitely, without generation loss", but with no follow up. However that is pretty self explanatory.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is overly detailed in my opinion, I think the author could have put the in depth explanation of digitization and put that in the Process section of the article. I also think that the last part of the Lead doesn't belong at all because it's making conclusion about digital and analog data that belong in their own section.

Content

 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article's content is inline with the topic at hand.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * As far as I can tell the information presented is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I would say the author covered all or most of the points that needed to be discussed in the article.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No, it's not really a concept where this question is applicable. Digitization is a relatively universal practice in the modern world and we're also in almost constant contact with products of digitization like photos on our phones or music streaming.

Tone and Balance

 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article represents a neutral position.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, the claims made were not biased heavily
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The section about digital preservation is the largest in the article despite it not being mentioned in the Lead
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * I wouldn't say there is persuasion, the Author says that digitization has benefits and that many groups do it for those benefits.

Sources and References

 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * There are a few points in the article where a statement is made and not backed up, particularly the latter part of the digital preservation section goes, "Many libraries, archives, and museums, as well as other institutions, struggle with catching up and staying current in regards to both digitization and digital preservation. Digitization is a time-consuming process, particularly depending on the condition of the holdings prior to being digitized. Some materials are so fragile that undergoing the process of digitization could damage them irreparably; light from a scanner can damage old photographs and documents. Despite potential damage, one reason for digitizing some materials is because they are so heavily used that digitization will help to preserve the original copy long past what its life would have been as a physical holding. Digitization can also be quite expensive. Institutions want the best image quality in digital copies so that when they are converted from one format to another over time only a high-quality copy is maintained. Smaller institutions may not be able to afford such equipment. Manpower at many facilities also limits how much material can be digitized. Archivists and librarians must have an idea of what their patrons wish to see most and try to prioritize and meet those needs digitally.  Labour resources and funding also limit digital preservation in many institutions. The cost of upgrading hardware or software every few years can be prohibitively expensive. Training is another issue since many librarians and archivists do not have a computer science background. Intellectual control of digital holdings presents yet another issue that sometimes occurs when the physical holdings have not yet been entirely processed. One suggested timeframe for completely transcribing digital holdings was every ten to twenty years, making the process an ongoing and time-consuming one.  Finally preserving digitized assets over long periods of time is challenging. Essentially you are storing a massive set of 1s and 0s. These signals can be physically burned onto media, like CDs, or stored magnetically, on hard drives. In either case, the storage mechanisms degrade over time. The physical materials degrade until the 1s or 0 marks can no longer be made out. The magnetic media degrades and loses its charge. If you alter just one 1 or one 0, you can significantly alter the recording. Thus data integrity with digitized assets in storage is a big challenge." Which I feel like is alot to say with no citations.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * All of the sources are relevant to their individual topics, for example the music section utilizes a economic assessment of how digitization has aided the music industry.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The majority of the sources are from mid 2000s to mid 2010s, not current, but not exactly dated either.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * There is a large variety of authors in the article, representing various fields.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * I checked 5 links and they all worked.

Sources and references evaluation

 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is good to read, good flow. less so on concise, but it gets the message across.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I saw
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article does reflect the major points of the topic, but also has extraneous information that "interrupts" the sections.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * the photos enhance the understanding of the topic in that you understand what the equipment necessary for digitization looks like.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The images are captioned with descriptions of their depictions.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I'm unsure.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The photos aren't displeasing to look at.

Checking the talk page

 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * One of the major topics o the talk page was merging, I'm not certain what merging is in the context of Wikipedia but I'm assuming it's the merging of multiple article of similar topic and content needs into one. Otherwise there was an entry critiquing the Digital Preservation section and another about adding the section about audio digitization.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated C-class and it was part of WikiProject Media, WikiProject Computing, WikiProject Digital Preservation, and WikiProject Libraries.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't talked about digitization directly, but we did talk about how information's mere existence in digital format can put it at risk, and that social media companies digitize and parse loads of information on us daily. So the way I'd say it differs from in class, is that there is not talk about possible downsides of digitization.

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It's a bit of a mess, however it would still be a useful resource for someone researching the topic or a related one.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Alot of good information on a variety of relevant subtopics, plenty of sources, and well constructed writing (mostly).
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Better structuring, more straight forward. More concise statements. Instead of going in depth on Digitization vs. Digital Preservation mention that the two are often confused, link the article about digital preservation and explain why.
 * 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, it's at the point where most if not all of the information needed for the article is there, however it hasn't been neatly put together yet.