Talk:Francisco Varela

From Geography

Revision as of 06:43, 25 October 2012

1. Relevance: It is relevant for this course. Rating: 10 (0-10) Comments: Literature and concepts of Jürgen Habermas play a very important role in this course.

2. Well-written: a) well-written: its prose is engaging, even brilliant, and of a professional standard; the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct; Rating: 6 (0-10) Comments: Its prose is sufficient but could use some improvement and elaboration. The level of quality of this wiki's prose varies when comparing the different topics this wiki contains. Spelling and grammar can be improved. b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context. Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: most important information is provided. However, since Habermas plays a key-role in this course, it could (or should) be elaborated.

3. well-researched: Factually accurate and verifiable: a) it provides references to all sources of information following the APA guidelines; Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: references are listed and correctly described following the APA guidelines. b) it provides in-line citations (including page numbers) from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the APA guidelines. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: references are correctly cited in the text, including page numbers.

4. Broad in its coverage: a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: Important aspects of Habermas' research and concepts are pointed out. However, since Habermas plays a key-role in this course, it could use some more context and background information. b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments:

5. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: Viewpoints are looked at without bias, the topics could use some more context, weight and size.

6. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: Multiple editors have contributed to this wiki. Although more information has been added bit by bit, the content and message appears to be stable.

7. Well-structured: a) a lead: a concise lead section that summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections; Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: Lead is informative, but could be more to the point. b) appropriate structure: a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: The structure of this wiki is sufficient. A table of content and secondary headlines, which focus on relevant subjects of Habermas' work, are being used. c) categories: is the entry categorized in a correct way? (Which categories are missing?) Rating: 7(0-10) Comments: The titles could be more to the point to provide more clarity to the structure. Categories about the life of Jürgen Habermas, his (academical) carreer, his relevance to geography and further reading are missing.

8. Illustrated: if possible, by images, maps, schematic overviews: a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; Rating: 5(0-10) Comments: The source of the image is not provided. b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: It is a relevant image which portrays Jürgen Habermas quite clearly and recognisably in a suitable background.

9. Length: It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: The wiki does stay focussed on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail. Some concepts of Habermas are explained pointwise.