Talk:Materialism

From Geography

1. Relevance: It is relevant for this course. Rating: 7/10 Comments: Although materialism ofcourse is important in geography, there are other concepts that are more essential in the field of geography.

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: The text is quite short but it tells enough to exactly know what is meant by materialism. Also the spelling is correct and references are made well. b) comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context. Rating:4 (0-10) Comments: Because the text is very short, it lacks examples and context. Major facts are said, but details and just like stated before examples are missing.

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: The author used the APA guidelines very well, but because he only used one source I gave him a 8. 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: Again he used the APA guidelines well but used only one source.

4. Broad in its coverage: a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: As stated before, the main aspects are being adressed well, just more details are missing, it could have been more than this. b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Rating: 8 (0-10) Comments: The text is very short and doesn't go into unnecessary detail, but it lacks the necessary details also.

5. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each. Rating: 10(0-10) Comments: The author perfectly adressed the facts without bias, no opinion is being given etc.

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: I think he made it in 1 time, he is the only author.

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: 6 (0-10) Comments: It is well structered, but that is because it only has a lead section. b) appropriate structure: a system of hierarchical section headings and a substantial but not overwhelming table of contents. Rating: 6 (0-10) Comments: Idem dito c) categories: is the entry categorized in a correct way? (Which categories are missing?) Rating: 4 (0-10) Comments: The text is not categorized, it should be categorised together with spirutalism and religion. (if this topics would exist)

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 pictures. 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: 6 (0-10) Comments: It's not to long, but it is way to short.