Talk:Theory of place
From Geography
Evaluation theory of place
1. Relevance: It is relevant for this course.
Rating: 8(0-10)
Comments: It helps to understand that all our actions are in relation to place and time
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: looks disheveled. sometimes sentences don't fit in relation to each other, like beginning a sentence with 'Because' while the previous sentence already explained something by using 'so'. Some grammar faults.
b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context.
Rating: 7 (0-10)
Comments: main points are mentioned
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: several references, following APA
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: reliable sources, no controversial statements, no quotations.
4. Broad in its coverage:
a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;
Rating: 7 (0-10)
Comments: main aspects are mentioned, but the article is not very profound.
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: -
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: structure does not change significantly
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: 5 (0-10)
Comments: no summarizing topic
b) appropriate structure: a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents.
Rating: 6 (0-10)
Comments: no section heading, not pleasant when reading
c) categories: is the entry categorized in a correct way? (Which categories are missing?)
Rating: - (0-10)
Comments: -
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: - (0-10)
Comments: no illustrations
b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
Rating: - (0-10)
Comments: -
9. Length: It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style.
Rating: 7 (0-10)
Comments: Not too short, but the main points summed up could be explained more
Evaluated by Rosalie Koen on 26 October 2012.
