Wikipedia Reliability Worksheet
Article title:
Answer the following questions to see how reliable a Wikipedia article is.
Start with the main page. Does it have any cleanup banners that have been placed there to indicate problems with the article? (A complete list is available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_messages/
Cleanup.)
Any one of the following cleanup banners means the article is an unreliable source:
This article or section has multiple issues.
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards.
The neutrality of this article is disputed.
The factual accuracy of this article is disputed.
This needs copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone or spelling.
This may contain material not appropriate for an encyclopedia.
This article only describes one highly specialized aspect of its associated subject.
This article requires authentication or verification by an expert.
This article or section needs to be updated.
This article may not provide balanced geographical coverage on a region.
This is missing citations or needs footnotes.
This article does not cite any references or sources.
No cleanup banners were found pretaining to this article
Read through the article and see if it meets the following requirements:
Is it written in a clear and organized way? The page is written in a linear fashion, going from the first year of the team's existence in 1996 until last year's season.
Is the tone neutral (not taking sides)? The tone of the page is as neutral as a fan sports page can be, no disparaging comments about other teams just the overall fan attitude of our own.
Are all important facts referenced (you're told where they come from)? All the information is the official website as well as articles from esteemed journalists.
Does the information provided seem complete or does it look like there are gaps (or just one side of the story)? No large gaps that I could see even when the team was renamed after its departure from Cleveland. However too little information was given on the band that was located in Baltimore that supported the Baltimore Colts.
Scroll down to the article's References and open them in new windows or tabs. Do they seem like reliable sources? (For help in determining the general reliability of a source, check out the Knowing What's What and What's Note: The 5 Ws (and 1 "H") of Cyberspace handout.)
Reliable references:
Baltimore Ravens official web site
Baltimore Sun
Possibly unreliable references:
Sports E-Cyclopedia.com
Ravens Post
NFL Fanhouse
Definitely unreliable references:
Baltimore Ravens blogs
Click on the Discussion tab. How is the article rated on the Rating Scale (Stub, Start, C, B, GA, A, FA)? What issues around the article are being discussed? Do any of them make you doubt the article's reliability?
The article itself was given a B rating as far as quality of content.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its importance is also rated higly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only issue was the relocation details and the Colts Band.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the above questions, give the article an overall ranking of Reliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable. Reliable.
You may use a Reliable article as a source (but remember that even if a Wikipedia article is reliable, it should never be your only source on a topic!)
You may use a Partially Reliable article as a starting point for your research, and may use some
of its references as sources, but do not us it as a source.
You should not use an Unreliable article as a source or a starting point. Research the same topic in a different encyclopedia.
How did you rank this article (Reliable, Partially Reliable or Unreliable)? Give at least three reasons to support
your answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment