Talk:Michel Foucault

From Geography

Rating (from 0-10, 10 being the highest, and 6 being just sufficient) 1. Relevance: It is relevant for this course. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: This Entry is very relevant. Michel Foucault is a prominent figure in this course and his theory is represented through the whole 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: 8 (0-10) Comments: Spelling and grammer are correct. This piece contains the professional standard that is asked.

b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context. Rating: 9(0-10) Comments: You can almost find everything that is said about Foucault

3. well-researched: Factually accurate and verifiable: a) it provides references to all sources of information following the APA guidelines; Rating: …… (0-10) Comments: …

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: 9 (0-10) Comments: The article follows the APA guidelines.

4. Broad in its coverage: a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; Rating: 8(0-10) Comments: It tells almost everything about Foucault and it is very well structured.

b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Rating: 7(0-10) Comments: Allthough he is an intressting figure, there is a lot of text about his personal life. You have to go through all that to find the information you ar loking for.

5. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments:

6. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: It is very well structured.

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: 10(0-10) Comments: Structure is perfect!

b) appropriate structure: a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents. Rating: 7(0-10) Comments: Like i mentioned before, the structure is very good, the hierachie as well, but the table of content is overwhelming.

c) categories: is the entry categorized in a correct way? (Which categories are missing?) Rating: 9(0-10) Comments: I don't miss categogries.

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: 10(0-10) Comments:

b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Rating: 9 (0-10) Comments: The images are relevant. A picture of Foucault at the beginning. Also a nice picture of Foucaults prison which suits to the theory.

9. Length: It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style. Rating: 6(0-10) Comments: It is a very long piece. Through all the information is is hard to keep focussed.

Evaluated by

Jesper Remmen --JesperRemmen 15:36, 22 October 2012 (CEST)