User:Imakespaghetti29/Evaluate an Article

Article Evaluation (Information Privacy)

• Name of article: Information Privacy
• I chose to evaluate this article on Information Privacy because it closely relates to the topic of Privacy, which I am very interested in.

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 Lead's introductory sentence very concisely and clearly describes the article's topic of Information Privacy. Even though we see a clear list of the article's major sections, a brief description of these sections are missing in the Lead. It includes only relevant information and has no information that is not explored further in the article. However, it is overly concise and could use a little more detail to provide more context and serve as a better introduction.

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?
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation

The article's content is very relevant to the over-arching topic of Information Privacy. However, most of the citations are from the 2000s and early 2010s, thus more up-to-date information might enrich the article. All of the content fits well into the article, however, something that is missing is the implications of information privacy concerns on individuals and society. The article does not deal with any of Wikipedia's equity gaps, and is very neutral and straightforward. It does not address any topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

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

Yes, the article is very neutral and articulate. The article presents facts and published research rather than any arguments, thus does not appear heavily based toward a particular position. Any viewpoints are adequately presented in a balanced manner, and are neither overrepresented or underrepresented. Thus, the article's articulate and unbiased nature does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another, and allows them to form their own opinion.

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?
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

Almost all the facts are backed up by a reliable secondary source of information, except some portions of 'Protection of privacy in information systems' and 'Information Types'. The sources mentioned are very thorough and reflect the available literature on the topic. However, the sources are not current; and almost all of them date back to the 2000s and early 2010s. Upon checking a section of the sources, I would say that the sources definitely represent a diverse spectrum of authors. When applicable, I could reasonably say that historically marginalized individuals when possible. The links in the article do work.

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 is very well organized and written; and is concise, clear and easy to read. I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors. The article is broken down into very clear and useful sections that reflect the major points of the topic.

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

Unfortunately, the article does not contain any images that enhance our understanding of the topic.

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 conversations going on behind the scenes on Information Privacy's talk page are very comprehensive and academic, and does not contain malicious or offensive content. The article has been C-class and of High Importance by several WikiProjects like WikiProject Computing, WikiProject Internet, and WikiProject Mass Surveillance. The way Wikipedia discusses the topic in a much more detailed and descriptive manner than we talk about in class. I believe it also takes a much more neutral stance since our discussions in class are in someway influenced by our own experiences and opinions on Information Privacy.

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

Overall, the article is very well developed and in good status. The article's strengths lie in its neutral and objective stance on the topic, which allows readers to form their own opinions on Information Privacy. The article could use more relevant sources, since most sources date back to the 2000s and the early 2010s. The article is very well organized, but could use some more sections on topics like implications of Information Privacy concerns on individuals and society, as a whole.

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: Talk Page