User:Recs7168/sandbox

Article Evaluation

Article - RuneScape

Does the article lead (aka lede) provide a clear overview of the main article content?

Yes, the introduction starts with a very high level description of the game and develops a lot of relevant background information.

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?

Everything in the article seems to have relevant information layed out very well. There's is nothing that is really off-topic.

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

There seems to be no bias.

Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or under-represented?

There seems to be no lacking viewpoints. All are represented equally.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted? 

Most knowledge comes from the developers themselves. The facts are unbiased, however.

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?

All information seems to be up-to-date and still relevant.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? 

Check.

 Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? 

Most of the conversations are just about adding relevant awards and titles that the game is receiving over time.

How is the article rated? Here is a link to a tool that shows the automatically-assessed quality of a Wikipedia article revision:  http://128.2.204.76:8000/ArticleQuality 

Score: 5.54/6

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Wikipedia does discuss the topic as though it were an encyclopedia page from a neutral points of view. Additionally, there were numerous authors/editors who respect each other’s edits and work together to change the article for the better. It doesn’t differ from the way we’ve talked about a wikipedia article in class.