User:Natasharintoul/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: Media ownership in Canada
  • Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
    • I have chosen to evaluate this article because through my various courses taken at SFU I have learned a lot about media ownership. I feel it would be a great starting point to this assignment.

Lead

edit
Guiding questions
  • Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
    • The lead introduces who governs media ownership in Canada, however it is unclear and the articles topic is not well defined.
  • Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
    • The lead mainly introduces the CRTC and provides a brief definition and background. It does not clearly state the articles major sections.
  • Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
    • No, however it does not include which information will be in the article.
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
    • The Lead is not detailed enough and does not provide enough relevant information on the article.

Lead evaluation

edit

Content

edit
Guiding questions
  • Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
    • Yes, the content of the article is relevant to the topic.
  • Is the content up-to-date?
    • Content is not up to date. Most information is referring to before 2010.
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
    • Up to date content about media concentration in Canada is missing.

Content evaluation

edit

Tone and Balance

edit
Guiding questions
  • Is the article neutral?
    • Article is neutral since it is hard to form and opinion on this subject, mostly just information.
  • Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
    • The information regarding the amount of ownership each company has could potentially form a biased opinion.
  • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
    • No viewpoints are portrayed.
  • Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
    • No

Tone and balance evaluation

edit

Sources and References

edit
Guiding questions
  • Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
    • Most facts are backed up with evidence.
  • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
    • The sources could be much more thorough if they had up to date information.
  • Are the sources current?
    • The sources are slightly outdated
  • Check a few links. Do they work?
    • Yes

Sources and references evaluation

edit

Organization

edit
Guiding questions
  • Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
    • Some paragraphs are more unclear than others. Some paragraphs could use more explanation.
  • Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
    • Very few or no grammatical errors.
  • Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
    • Sections could be added in order to add detail and information on further topics. Some sections seem irrelevant and more basic knowledge could be shared.

Organization evaluation

edit

Images and Media

edit
Guiding questions
  • Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
    • No
  • Are images well-captioned?
    • N/A
  • Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
    • N/A
  • Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
    • N/A

Images and media evaluation

edit

Checking the talk page

edit
Guiding questions
  • What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
    • The comments on the talk page suggest that further research be done in order to clarify some topics.
  • How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
    • Article is supported by WikiProjects Canada and was used in Wiki Education Foundation.
  • How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
    • This article talks about it in a much more broad and general sense rather than linking it to other specific concepts.

Talk page evaluation

edit

Overall impressions

edit
Guiding questions
  • What is the article's overall status?
    • S status. Lots of room for improvement.
  • What are the article's strengths?
    • The article has relevant information that is clear and backed up by sources.
  • How can the article be improved?
    • Article could benefit from further research and detail, as well as being more current and up to date.
  • How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
    • The article is underdeveloped and could use more relevant information to the specific topic.

Overall evaluation

edit

Optional activity

edit
  • 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: