Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections. Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
This essay examines how to evaluate sources within the context of Wikipedia's content policies. Part of evaluating a source is deciding whether it is a primary, secondary, or tertiary source. For the policy on sourcing issues, see this section of Wikipedia:No original research, and Wikipedia:Verifiability. If there are inconsistencies between ...
An article that faithfully reflects the information and intent of a large number of high quality sources is likely to be a very reliable indicator of the current state of knowledge on a subject. An article with fewer or no sources listed or sources of lower quality may not reflect a researcher's desired high quality.
You can see how an article has evolved over time by clicking the "View history" link at the top of every article. When you open the "View History" page, you'll see a list of recent changes to the article, with some comments about what other editors have done. You can compare histories between articles by clicking on the buttons next to each line.
Source credibility is "a term commonly used to imply a communicator's positive characteristics that affect the receiver's acceptance of a message." [1] Academic studies of this topic began in the 20th century and were given a special emphasis during World War II, when the US government sought to use propaganda to influence public opinion in support of the war effort.
In a 2017 article, Cara Berg, a reference librarian and co-coordinator of user education at William Paterson University emphasizes website evaluation as a tool for active research. [5] At Berg's university, for example, library instruction is given to roughly 300 different classes, each in different subjects that require some type of research ...
The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible.
Similarly, where an article title is of the type "List of ...", a clearer and more informative introduction to the list is better than verbatim repetition of the title. When the page title is used as the subject of the first sentence, it may appear in a slightly different form, and it may include variations. [5]