Talk:In-order-to motive

From Geography

Revision as of 13:17, 17 October 2012 by MalouVanWoerkum (Talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

1. Relevance: 6 Useful terminology, with clear distinction from because motive.

2. Well-written a) well-written: 9 Easy to read and to the point b) comprehensive: 9 See above

3. well-researched a) it provides references to all sources of information following the APA guidelines: 9 Good use of sources in APA style 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: 7 Source is clear and reliable.

4. Broad in its coverage a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic: 8 subject is explained, and to the point. b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail: 8 Subject is clearly explained. Maybe an example would be a good edition

5. Neutral: 10 It is neutral

6. Stable: 8 It does not change from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute

7. Well-structured a) a lead: 7 There is a introduction, but not a summary of the text. b) appropriate structure: 6 Headings not used, but not really necessary. c) categories: 1 Missing.

8. Illustrated a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 6 Not available, but not necessary. b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: /

9. Length: 8 It stays focused on the main topic without going into too much details.


Evaluated by Malou van Woerkum


Personal tools