Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Assessment/RexxS

RexxS' PPI Assessment Page
RexxS is classified as a Wikipedia expert

Assessment 1, part 1
The purpose of this evaluation in not to gauge variability in article quality, but to look at the metric itself. How consistent is this assessment tool? and Is there a difference in scores between subject area expert assessment and Wikipedian article assessment?


 * If possible please assess the requested articles within 2 weeks. 22:51, 22 September 2010.

Equal Access to COBRA Act (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness = 1
 * Sourcing = 1
 * Neutrality = 1
 * Readability = 0
 * Illustrations = 0
 * Formatting = 0
 * Total = 3

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Equal_Access_to_COBRA_Act&oldid=364536146 Assessment date: 23 September 2010

Monetary policy of the United States (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: Partially Summary Style, US Treasury section blank; Far too much emphasis on Federal Reserve, rather than on policy = 5
 * Sourcing: Some sections inadequately sourced; quality of sources often not meeting RS = 2
 * Neutrality: Insufficient high-quality sources to properly establish a NPOV = 1
 * Readability: Prose is good, apart from two sections over-reliant on lists = 2
 * Illustrations: 1 graph; 1 uncaptioned image in infobox = 1
 * Formatting: Lead does not summarise article and is dominated by 2 side-bar navboxes (multiple other navboxes at bottom); structure is slightly muddled, (e.g. Achievements' is subsection of Opinions of the Federal Reserve"); See also links multiple articles already well-linked = 1
 * Total = 12

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Monetary_policy_of_the_United_States&oldid=371503529 Assessment date: 25 September 2010

James Q Wilson (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: one main source; room for expansion; start date of tenure at UCLA contradicted by source = 3
 * Sourcing: main source dead link (since fixed); external links have potential as sources = 2
 * Neutrality: insufficient sourcing to demonstrate NPOV = 1
 * Readability: reasonably good = 2
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: structure ok, would expect a bio to cover Early life = 1
 * Total = 9

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=James_Q._Wilson&oldid=371970927 Assessment date: 26 September 2010

Reorganization Plan No. 3 (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: stub, lacking detail of the Plan and its significance = 1
 * Sourcing: source is far better than article; needs more sources = 1
 * Neutrality: inadequate sourcing to determine = 1
 * Readability: reasonably clear = 2
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: stub, so no structure; well-formatted reference = 1
 * Total = 6

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reorganization_Plan_No._3&oldid=348082833 Assessment date: 26 September 2010

National Partnership for Reinventing Government (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: stub; needs history, significance and more context = 2
 * Sourcing: no references, only ELs = 1
 * Neutrality: indeterminable = 0
 * Readability: very disjointed, but error-free = 1
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: outline reasonable; wikified; needs list converted to prose = 1
 * Total = 5

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Partnership_for_Reinventing_Government&oldid=275908305 Assessment date: 26 September 2010

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: covers bill and context, but consequences need revison = 7
 * Sourcing: about 50% sourced; some external links used as references = 3
 * Neutrality: mainly neutrally reported; Unintended consequences of RFS mandate is unsourced and adds POV = 2
 * Readability: mainly good, needs copyedit: one section is a list; small grammar errors (e.g. "all of the gasoline in the US is being taken E10") = 2
 * Illustrations: one image = 1
 * Formatting: needs overview of structure to group related sections into subsections; external links need to be integrated as references = 1
 * Total = 16

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Energy_Independence_and_Security_Act_of_2007&oldid=368884058 Assessment date: 29 September 2007

Fly America Act (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: difficult to assess, given the total lack of sources; estimate = 4
 * Sourcing: None; much of the second section appears to be a direct copy of the Regulations (e.g. 41CFR301-10.138) = 0
 * Neutrality: fifth para of lead draws conclusions, but is unsourced = 0
 * Readability: dense passages of regulations; requires full re-write = 0
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: no structure; requires lead, description of Act & summary of exceptions, context, commentary = 0
 * Total = 4

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fly_America_Act&oldid=355899716 Assessment date: 29 September 2010

Universal health care (1 July 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: dominated by comprehensive survey of health care by country; requires overview, expand Africa = 8
 * Sourcing: History unsourced except last sentence; some subsections tagged as unsourced = 4
 * Neutrality: very largely descriptive; reporting of analysis seems NPOV = 3
 * Readability: good = 3
 * Illustrations: for a large article (50 KB of prose), supporting media is sparse = 1
 * Formatting: requires a lead that introduces significance, provides context, and summarises article; needs alt text for images = 1
 * Total = 20

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universal_health_care&oldid=371079191 Assessment date: 29 September 2010

Assessment 1, request 2
Assessment request 2, all from 1 October 2010 or there about. There are a couple of rereviews, hopefully those will be fast.

Permanent residence (United States) (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: quite good; missing context of comparison with other countries = 7
 * Sourcing: many paragraphs unsourced; legal documents well sourced, but commentary is poorly sourced = 2
 * Neutrality: many views unsourced, so NPOV cannot be determined = 1
 * Readability: unbalanced between 'how-to' lists and "readable prose" (14 kB or 2331 words); needs re-write to make use of subsections = 1
 * Illustrations: good illustrations, but fail WP:Accessibility = 1
 * Formatting = some of the lead should be in a History/Background section; lead needs to summarise article; Confused & disjointed structure = 1
 * Total = 13

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Permanent_residence_%28United_States%29&oldid=388167146 Assessment date: 9 October 2010

Great Society (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: good, lacking only expansion of Legacy section = 8
 * Sourcing: Bibliography present, but lacks many inline citations; uncited quotation in Environment = 2
 * Neutrality: mainly factual, but criticisms rely too strongly on juxtaposition of primary sources; needs more secondaries for overview = 2
 * Readability: good, engaging prose = 3
 * Illustrations: one image without alt text; many need to be found (riots/civil rights/model cities/cultural centers/transportation/consumer protection?) = 0
 * Formatting: remarkably concise lead; good structure and MOS-compliance = 2
 * Total = 17

Note: Fails B-1, B-5, B-6 - good C-Class, should be a priority for improving.

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Great_Society&oldid=387684934 Assessment date: 9 October 2010

Executive Order 11478 (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: defines topic; lacks overview, context, implementation, impact = 2
 * Sourcing: adequate for verifiability; unsatisfactory through lack of broader perspectives = 3
 * Neutrality: NPOV indeterminable; fails to provide any evidence of major points of view = 0
 * Readability: understandable, but would benefit from copy edit = 1
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: stub, so no structure, but not a detraction from reading = 1
 * Total = 7

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Executive_Order_11478&oldid=387200585 Assessment date: 9 October 2010

Homeland Security Act (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: definition, some context and criticism, lacks any real development = 3
 * Sourcing: unsourced = 0
 * Neutrality: indeterminable = 0
 * Readability: comprehensible = 2
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: stub, so no structure, but not a detraction from reading = 1
 * Total = 6

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Homeland_Security_Act&oldid=385452170 Assessment date: 9 October 2010

Public Citizen (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: descriptive, but undeveloped = 4
 * Sourcing: almost totally unsourced = 1
 * Neutrality: no presentation of NPOV = 0
 * Readability: readable, but needs lists converted to readable prose = 2
 * Illustrations: logo deleted per NFCC rules, one other image; lacking alt text = 0
 * Formatting: reasonably structured; fails WP:SECTION = 1
 * Total = 8

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Public_Citizen&oldid=387750585 Assessment date: 9 October 2010

War on Drugs (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness =
 * Sourcing =
 * Neutrality =
 * Readability =
 * Illustrations =
 * Formatting =
 * Total =

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=War_on_Drugs&oldid=388122976 Assessment date:

Equal Access to COBRA Act (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: stub, definition only = 1
 * Sourcing: bill cited + NYT article = 4
 * Neutrality: indeterminable = 0
 * Readability: one sentence = 2
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: stub, no structure = 1
 * Total = 8

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Equal_Access_to_COBRA_Act&oldid=385274569 Assessment date: 9 October 2010

Fly America Act (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness: missing dates, context, and any development or commentary = 3
 * Sourcing: none = 0
 * Neutrality: POV in lead, but unsourced = 0
 * Readability: incomprehensible = 0
 * Illustrations: none = 0
 * Formatting: no lead, disjointed structure = 0
 * Total = 3

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fly_America_Act&oldid=385275376 Assessment date: 9 October 2010

Universal health care (1 October 2010)

 * Comprehensiveness =
 * Sourcing =
 * Neutrality =
 * Readability =
 * Illustrations =
 * Formatting =
 * Total =

Article version: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Universal_health_care&oldid=388091557 Assessment date: