User:SteveHornyak34/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: Chinese Room
 * This article talks in part about how a computer will never have a mind or any stream of consciousness, even if the computer is acts as if it were a human. Furthermore, the article explains the origin of the name "Chinese Room" and the background of the subject, such as the history of the question of whether computers have minds. Along with this, the article brings about great information on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the ethical question surrounding whether computers could ever understand human ideas and concepts.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The article presents a brief overview in the beginning, introducing what is meant by the name "Chinese Room", and then breaks down how the idea relates to a specific field, in this case the field is AI and the ethics surrounding AI. Afterwards, the article then examines the history of the question the article is addressing, then develops further ideas and brings in more background information to the article, presenting a very detail-oriented article, but allows for simplicity by conveying the information in a mix of professional and common speech.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The article is recent, however, it appears that the article may need some updating, as many of the sources range from 10 years old to nearly 50 years old. With that, there may be some missing information from current research and development. In terms of the topic, the content is very relevant and does not stray from the main idea that is referred from this idea of the Chinese room thought experiment.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of the article is very neutral and has a great sense of just presenting information, leading to a non-biased viewpoint. There is some information that as it is presented appears to have a slight biased, but the article is able to balance that bias out with some other opinions from other researchers and their development.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All of the information presented in the article is consistent with the topic at hand and presents the opinions of professionals on the topic, making sure to have a variety of sources from each viewpoint of the subject, maintaining that lack of bias in the article. All of the sources also come from credible sources, with a lot of the sources coming from books, journals and other publications.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article provides lot's of information, which may pose as being a bit overwhelming, but with some further research and development of the topic, the article is able to become easily readable and even in the brief descriptions of the subjects allows for a simple description of the basics of the topic. In other words, the article begins by presenting a simple and direct foundation of knowledge on the subject, but then increases the depth of the topic by breaking the topic into other sections for further analysis of the subject.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
The images and media of the article are quite sparse, with only three picture in the entire article. In this sense, there a very large blocks of text that go very in depth. If there were a visual learner reading this article, they may have a tough time interpreting all of the information. The images are very well captioned, which helps for the article to further explain the concept to the reader whilst remaining original pictures and being very generic pictures, such as a drawing or a portrait of a person.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The article is rated as a B-Class and has a high importance. The conversations in the talk section are very much in limiting the bias of professionals in the article, such as how to promote a neutral tone and how to further simplify the article so that future readers can better understand the content while not needing a detailed background to understand the content of the article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
The article appears to be a very solid article. The content and flow of the article is there with some small errors throughout the article. I think that the article could be better defined and needs some more research done to find information that relates to the subject while also further expanding on how this topic is relevant for today's learners.

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: