Talk:Conflictual (power) relationship
From Geography
Evaluation of the topic Conflictual (power) relationship
Rating (from 0-10, 10 being the highest, and 6 being just sufficient) 1. Relevance: It is relevant for this course. Rating: 9 Comments: The social relationship is divided by Max Weber into three forms of conflictual relationships. Weber is a key thinker in this course, so also his theories and the types of relationships are important.
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 Comments: Well written, some grammar foults. b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context. Rating: 8 Comments: places the subject in context, no major facts are missing.
3. well-researched: Factually accurate and verifiable: a) it provides references to all sources of information following the APA guidelines; Rating: 9 Comments: enough sources and references 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 Comments: some page numbers are missing
4. Broad in its coverage: a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; Rating: 10 Comments: Adresses the power relationship b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Rating: 10 Comments: also information about how to analyse power relationship
5. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. Rating: 8 Comments: Critique is missing(if there is critique?), different pro’s.
6. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Rating: 8 Comments: Created in 2011, enhanced twice in 2012
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 Comments: The lead is immediately the focuspoint. Maybe their could have been more information about weber and how he came up with these relationships. b) appropriate structure: a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents. Rating: 6 Comments: No table of contents, short text. c) categories: is the entry categorized in a correct way? (Which categories are missing?) Rating: n/a Comments: no category
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: n/a Comments: no images b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Rating: n/a Comments: no images
9. Length: It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style. Rating: 8 Comments: Stays focused on main topic. Doesn’t go into detail of unrelated subjects.
