|
This article or section has
multiple issues.
|
no
|
|
This article may require cleanup
to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
|
no
|
|
The neutrality of this article is
disputed.
|
no
|
|
The factual accuracy of this
article is disputed.
|
On a few instances
|
|
This needs copy editing for
grammar, style, cohesion, tone or spelling.
|
no
|
|
This may contain material not
appropriate for an encyclopedia.
|
no
|
|
This article only describes one
highly specialized aspect of its associated subject.
|
no
|
|
This article requires authentication
or verification by an expert.
|
no
|
|
This article or section needs to
be updated.
|
Yes, it could use more info.
|
|
This article may not provide
balanced geographical coverage on a region.
|
no
|
|
This is missing citations or needs
footnotes.
|
no
|
|
This article does not cite any
references or sources.
|
no
|
- Read through the article and see if it meets the
following requirements:
|
Is it written in a clear and
organized way?
|
yes
|
|
Is the tone neutral (not taking
sides)?
|
yes
|
|
Are all important facts referenced
(you're told where they come from)?
|
yes
|
|
Does the information provided seem
complete or does it look like there are gaps (or just one side of the story)?
|
complete
|
- Scroll down to the article's References and open them
in new windows or tabs. Do they seem like reliable sources? (For help in
determining the general reliability of a source, check out the Knowing What's
What and What's Note: The 5 Ws (and 1 "H") of Cyberspace handout.)
Reliable references: Bitmap, and a Economics professor
Possibly unreliable references:
Definitely unreliable references: one author
- Click on the Discussion tab. How is the article rated on the Rating Scale (Stub, Start, C, B, GA, A, FA)? What issues around the
article are being discussed? Do any of them make you doubt the article's
reliability?
Class B rated
- Based on the above questions, give the article an
overall ranking of Reliable, Partially
Reliable or Unreliable.
- You may use a Reliable article as a source (but remember that even if a Wikipedia article is reliable, it should never be your only
source on a topic!)
- You may use a Partially Reliable article as a starting point for your research, and
may use some
of its references as sources, but do not us it as a source. - You should not use an Unreliable article as a source or a starting point. Research the
same topic in a different encyclopedia.
How did you rank this article (Reliable, Partially Reliable or
Unreliable)? Give at least three reasons to support
your answer.
your answer.
I would rank the article
as reliable, because it has two reliable authors, cites factual information and
doesn’t seem biased. It could use a
little more information in the article to add more authenticity, but I still
think that it is a good article to use as a general reference point.
No comments:
Post a Comment