Talk:Francisco Varela

From Geography

1. Relevance: It is relevant for this course. Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: The concept of autopoiesis is relevant for the course. Although some things are said about autopoietic systems, it could have been elaborated more.

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: 7 (0-10) Comments: Its prose is engaging, well written. b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context. Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: Although the most information is given, as said the concept of autopoiesis could have gotten a bit more attention.

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: 5 (0-10) Comments: references are not cited in the text.

4. Broad in its coverage: a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; Rating: 6 (0-10) Comments: Although the reader gets an impression of Varela and his work, it could have been elaborated a bit more. b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: The wiki is clear and focussed on the topic.

5. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: Viewpoints are looked at without bias, but the topics could use some more context.

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: Only two editors have contributed to this wiki, so the content remains 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: It's directly clear that the topic focusses on Varela and his work, but it could have been a bit more elaborated whitin subsequent sections. 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 is clear, even so is the table of content. c) categories: is the entry categorized in a correct way? (Which categories are missing?) Rating: 5(0-10) Comments: There are no categories added, but this text could be filed under 'Persons'.

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: 7(0-10) Comments: The source of the image is provided. b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: It is a relevant image which portrays Francisco Varela clearly.

9. Length: It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style. Rating: 7 (0-10) Comments: The wiki is focussed on the main topic, the person of Fracisco Varela, but could have gone into a little more detail.