Is this an accurate article?
Does it cover all the basic facts that you'd need to understand this topic?
Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines for useful articles?
Is this article fair and balanced, or is it biased towards a particular side or argument?
I have taken two topics of which I would consider myself an expert on; Counter-Strike (a computer game) and Entourage (a TV-show). I will evaluate the following wiki-pages using the questions above as criteria.
Is this an accurate article?
CS: Very accurate, practically everything one would want to find and know about the game is there, and presumably accurate as the figures come from VALVe.
Entourage: Accurate background history on the show and the producers, with some interesting information some would call irrelevant trivia!
Does it cover all the basic facts that you'd need to understand this topic?
CS: It covers more than all the basic facts, it not only explains what the game is, it also lists the changes made between the different beta phases.
Entourage: Very much, only thing perhaps lacking is diagrams of the popularity of the show in various parts of the world.
Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines for useful articles?
I would have to say yes that it does for both of them, it starts off with a brief introduction and then leads into more detail as all other wiki-articles do.
Is this article fair and balanced, or is it biased towards a particular side or argument?
CS: Very fair and balanced.
Entourage: One gets the impression that the person who wrote this is an Entourage fan, as it is described in a "positive light"!
It is hard to say what changes I would make, but perhaps I would briefly discuss similar shows/games, so people that may not have seen either the show or the game can somehow relate to the articles better.
No comments:
Post a Comment