English 102 Library Instruction: Evaluation
Five Key Questions of Media Literacy
Evaluating a Wikipedia Article
|When looking at a specific Wikipedia article, consider the following:||
- Are there any boxes indicating that additional references or other improvement is needed?
- Are there references and/or external links listed at the end of the article? Are they mostly to websites or other Wikipedia articles? Do they look useful?
- Click on the Talk tab. Are there ratings or indications of the quality or comprehensiveness? Is there a list of what needs to be added or changed? Are there any questions about the validity of this article?
- Click on the “View History” tab near the top. Then click on (earliest). When was this article created?.
- On average, about how often is this article edited? Lots of editing can improve the quality, but sometimes it can mean there is disagreement.
- Approximately how many people appear to have contributed to this article ( just a handful? too many to count?)
- Is there evidence of edit wars or arguments over content (for example, the same changes keep getting made then undone)?
- Is there evidence of frequent vandalism (many changes with edits that say “vandalism” or something similar)?
When you find a book in the catalog or on the shelf, how do you decide if it is a good source for your research? Books generally undergo more evaluation before publishing than some websites, and, if a library owns a book, that means more evaluation has taken place (for purchase and inclusion). However, you still need to check for quality and relevance. Here is a link to some questions you should ask:
Want to learn more about evaluation?
Are your sources credible?
How to Spot Fake News
Bias in news sources
Scholarly vs. popular sources video
Scholarly vs. Popular Resources
|Content||Original research and inquiry||General interest stories and opinion pieces; may discuss research studies, but do not contain original research|
|Purpose||Share research to expand knowledge base in a discipline||
Share news, general information, and entertainment; for profit
|Audience||Professors, researchers, professionals, experts, students||General public|
|Author||Experts in the field. Name, credentials, and affiliations are provided.||Journalist or professional writer, who are not experts or specialists in a field. Sometimes no author name or credentials are given.|
|Article Structure||Includes clearly labeled parts such as abstract (article summary), and references (bibliography, works cited). May also include and introduction, background, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, conclusion, notes, appendices and more.||Structure varies. May have titled subsections, but they will rarely be the same labels as a scholarly work. Do not have abstracts or reference lists.|
|Language||Scholarly or technical language; may require prior knowledge of field, issues, and jargon||Easily understood language; does not require special knowledge|
|Peer review||Usually. Articles are verified by experts in the field; emphasize accuracy, trustworthiness, and validity.||No|
|Citations||Yes. Other sources will be cited in text and will have full citations/references in footnotes or reference/works cited list at the end of the paper.||Rarely. Sources will often be referred to, but rarely have full citations. No reference/works cited list.|
|Appearance||Serious and simple; often black and white||Glossy, colorful; attractive images and design; full page ads|
|Images||Sometimes. May contain charts, diagrams, and tables; photography is rare outside of specific disciplines.||Yes. Heavily illustrated with many photos|
|Advertisements||Rarely. If so, they are small, discreet, and subject related||Yes. Profit-based publication; a significant portion is allocated to ads|
|Length||Longer. Length is variable, but usually between 10-30 pages||Shorter. A couple hundred words to a few pages|
Information in this table was created in conjunction with viewing the University of Victoria's Research Tips Central pages.