Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Behavioral Ecology (Joan Strassmann)/Grading

Overall Grading:

Entries must meet all of the criteria below. 1. Thesis and Analytic Focus: Is the contribution on a manageable and focused topic that can be addressed with detailed scholarly support, introducing both an organism and some of its more interesting behavior in a conceptual framework? (Contributions on overly broad topics are discouraged as these can be difficult to do well.)

2. Content and Analysis:

Does the contribution include a reasonable outline for the material that fully covers the topic, relevant issues, and key debates, if any? Note: you can propose more sections than those you actually write. Are the points well supported by evidence with sufficient references and analysis? Does the contribution consider a variety of perspectives rather than relying on just the point of view of one or two scholars? Does the contribution take an appropriate tone in providing competing points of view?  Are nuances and subtle distinctions clarified appropriately?

3. Wikiproject and Article Discussion responses: Does the contribution adequately take into account responses to posts by the contributor (you) to WikiProject and Article Discussion pages?

4. References and attributions: Are all claims supported where appropriate with references, and are sources represented accurately, with references following an approved form? Is language precise, so that sources do not overstate claims and represent the nature of studies and the evidence provided? (For example, instead of writing that Source A “says” or Authors C and B “write”, supportive references are presented with such phrasing as “[Author A] observed 30 nests of jabberwockies to show…”).

5. Links:

Does the entry link to a wide variety of other entries? Are there sufficient links to relevant related topics?

6. Organization and style: How well written is the entry? Does it have a clear focus and is it well organized? Are the paragraphs well structured?

7. Language: Are sentences carefully crafted to be clear, avoiding passive voice and grammatical errors? Is the entry accessible to Wikipedia’s broad audience, including people from different educational levels, backgrounds, nationalities, and expertise in English? Is complex language avoided when simple words and sentences will express the same idea clearly and concisely?

8. Mechanics: Does the contribution follow the appropriate Wikipedia style? Has the entry been proofread to remove typos, wording errors, misspellings, etc.? Has the submitted entry followed the proper formatting details of Wikipedia? Is the entry legible when printed and in 12pt font?

9. Response to Previous Comments: Have previous comments made on the proposal, and by others on the WikiProject and Article Discussion pages, been taken into account and adequately addressed?

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Attribution: This version is modified from the original work of Diana Strassmann.