User:Gracie15/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article[edit]

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

Name of article: (link) Talk:Digital rights
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because I am interested in the development of technological policy. I think that it's an important subject to research and provide clear and factual information about this subject, because it is so new and continuing to develop.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes - the introduction is fairly short but offers a good baseline of the nature of the article.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? It provides a "Contents" section but not a description within the opening paragraph
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think that if anything, the lead is not detailed enough. There is a lot of room for expansion with many of the ideas brought up that I believe could really enrich the article.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
Is the content up-to-date? no, it has not been updated since 2017. That doesn't sound like too long ago but with a topic like digital rights, one that is ever-changing and growing, I feel like three years is too long of a time to not update.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I believe that there should be more explicit examples of internet availability laws, or lack thereof, in countries that are not mentioned. Most of the countries used as examples are European, with the exception of Costa Rica.

Is the article neutral? Yes - very factually based.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, but as I read the talk pages I can see that a portion of the article was edited out due to it's biased nature.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? UN-heavy, not much mention about individual federal governments laws on digital rights
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, although I am sure there are tons of other sources on the subject of digital rights that could be included.
Are the sources current? Fairly current - most recent source cited back to summer 2019
Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There is a conversation about how a writer incorporated their opinion in the article, a suggestion to merge two similar articles together because of how similar the nature of their content it
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? rated level 5-vital article, included in four WikiProjects: Internet Culture, Human Rights, Internet, and Open
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? the article's content is much more driven by government processes and conventions, and does not include too much information of advocacy groups (other than a section for links) or organizations trying to shape digital rights who are not government entities

What is the article's overall status? Pretty developed
What are the article's strengths? A lot of credible sources
How can the article be improved? more information from different angles regarding digital rights
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? well-developed

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 — ~~~~