User:Tavleenbhatia/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
 * Filter bubble
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * The article provides key information about a significant issue occurring in the contemporary climate of media and democracy today therefore the importance of keeping this article up-to-date, ensuring its well-written, and utilizing academic articles is the utmost priority.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead does include an introductory sentence that explains the concept of filter bubble concisely and clearly.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, the lead includes a contents table of the article's major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the lead includes information that is present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise.

Lead evaluation
Overall, the lead for this article contains concise information that sets a good foundation for the rest of the article. Its introductory sentence explains the concept of filter bubble clearly with basic means without getting overly detailed. Also, it contains a Contents table that introduce the readers with the article's major sections and contains information only presented in the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No, there isn't any content that is missing or any content that does not belong.

Content evaluation
Overall, the content in the article is constantly being updated in addition to utilizing recent sources. Further, all content in the article is relevant to the topic of filter bubble and includes precise information without information that doesn't belong.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, there are no claims that appear to be heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The viewpoints from Eli Pariser are overrepresented, however one must consider the fact that the term and concept of filter bubble was coined by Eli Pariser himself, so most information is bound to come from Pariser and therefore be overrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favour of one position or away from another.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the tone and balance of the article is neutral. It does a great job at providing information and viewpoints from different sides, the perspectives of those that believe in the conception of filter bubbles to the perspectives of those who don't. However, the viewpoints from Eli Pariser are overrepresented. Considering that, the article still includes opposing viewpoints, therefore balancing and neutralizing the article. Lastly, it does not sway the reader towards one viewpoint, it merely tries to provide information from all sides.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, all facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, the sources are thorough and reflect available literature on the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, the sources are current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * I checked around 10 links and out of those 10, they all worked.

Sources and references evaluation
Overall, the sources and references found in the article are reliable, thorough, and current. The article contains a good amount of sources and references. Also, it comes from a good time frame.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the article is well-written- it is concise, clear, and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, the article does not 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?
 * Yes, the article is very well-organized.

Organization evaluation
Overall, the article is well-written as it emphasizes the importance and urgency of filter bubbles as a media issue. It is also free of any grammatical or spelling errors that cause distraction or misunderstanding. Lastly, the organization is well as it is broken down into sections that are in order therefore benefit the readers.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No. Although the article does include two images, it does not enhance the understanding of the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, the images are well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, the two images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, the images are laid out in a visually appealing way.

Images and media evaluation
Overall, the images and media presentation is not helpful. First, only two images are used and of those two, only one attempts to enhance understanding but ends up confusing the reader. Although the captions are well-written, the images themselves fail to help the reader directly.

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 several conversations going on behind the scenes varying from adding new sections to some critiques.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated C-class. The article is a part of four WikiProjects which are:
 * WikiProject Internet
 * WikiProject Computing
 * WikiProject Google
 * WikiProject Psychology
 * 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 in a broader sense as opposed to specifying it on case-by-case basis whereas in class we talked about in the specific case of Twitter, the public sphere, journalism, and news.

Talk page evaluation
Overall, the talk page has several ongoing conservations and future plans for this article to better its information and content. In specific, most of the talk has been about how the article focuses on the negative consequences of filter bubbles as opposed to the positive advantages which might include getting advertisements based on an individual's liking and preferences.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's overall status is rated C- class.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article is well-written as it is concise, clear, and easy to read.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can include more images and media to enhance understanding as well as include positive consequences of filter bubbles without compromising the importance and significance of the negative consequences.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is well developed with a little scope of improvement.

Overall evaluation
Overall, the article provides a great understanding of the concept of filter bubbles and emphasizes how the negative consequences can impact democracy.

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: