Wikipedia talk:Education program archive/University of San Francisco/Environmental Law (Spring 2013)/Grading

Grading
Wikipedia contributions will be graded as follows:


 * 5% each (x3): Participation grade for early Wikipedia exercises (weeks 2, 3, and 4)
 * 10%: Participation in Wikipedia discussions in class
 * 10%: Peer reviews and collaboration with classmates
 * 15%: Presentation and reflective essay
 * 50%: Quality of main Wikipedia contributions, evaluated in light of reflective essay

Review criteria
This section describes some criteria to help you determine what to look for when reviewing your classmates' articles.

The following general criteria are based on the good article criteria:
 * Well-written:
 * the prose is clear and concise, is not copied illegally from third-party sources, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and
 * it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, and list incorporation.
 * Verifiable with no original research :
 * it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons;
 * it contains no original research.
 * Broad in its coverage:
 * it addresses the main aspects of the topic;
 * it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
 * Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
 * Illustrated, if possible, by images:
 * images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions; and
 * any images that you uploaded yourself have been reviewed by a Campus Ambassador or Online Ambassador for compliance with copyright policy.
 * The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Detailed checklist for article review
Remember that one of the learning objectives for this assignment is for you to take a subject that is otherwise highly specialized and make it accessible to a general audience - distilling the essential aspects of the subject down to a plain and concise format.


 * 1)     Does the lead section provide a stand-alone concise summary of the article? See: [|Lead section] and for an even more thorough treatment see: Guide to writing better articles.
 * 2)     Is the contribution clear; written to avoid ambiguity and misunderstanding, using logical structure, and plain clear prose; free of redundant language?
 * 3)     Is field-specific jargon avoided where possible and explained where necessary? I.e., is the general lay audience of an encyclopedia adequately kept in mind?
 * 4)     Does the contribution maintain a neutral point of view, consist of verifiable statements, and avoid becoming original research/opinion?
 * 5)     In general are the reasons why the article topic is notable made clear, providing enough detail on important aspects, without providing too much detail on minor points?
 * 6)     Are facts cited from reputable sources, preferably sources that are accessible and up-to-date? Are additional references for further reading provided?
 * 7)     Correct grammar, verb tenses, and spelling? Common mistake: multiple verb tenses throughout article. Most of the topics of these articles describe past events, so use past tense consistently throughout. "The plaintiff argued...The defendant responded...The court decided..." NOT The Plaintif argues...The defendant responds...The court decides..."
 * 8)     Are wikilinks, i.e., links to other Wikipedia articles, provided where appropriate?   Is the page edited an orphan? See "What links here" in the Toolbox on the left margin. If so, find relevant articles elsewhere and create wikilinks to the page you are editing.
 * 9)     Are links provided to publicly-available versions of all primary sources, such as court opinions? Are citations done properly?
 * 10)     Are references formatted properly? See technical guidelines on our project page where it explains: Subsequent references to the same source then just need and see generally Referencing for beginners.
 * 11)     Is there an Infobox Template that could be used on this page?  For example, there are separate templates for District Court cases, Circuit Court Cases, and for various legal topics. Ask if you are unsure what sort of Infobox is most appropriate.

([ Click to return to your main course page and continue.])