User:The Critical Librarian/sandbox/articlereview

Article Evaluation for Library and information science

Improvement Suggestions:

• The lead section is long and contain historical information about library schools (not library and information science) that does not need to be in the intro/lead. I would move some of the lead paragraph down to a new section titled History.
• I would try to create a clearer lead section that indicates Library and Information Science is a profession, and a quick understanding of what LIS professionals do.
• The second sentence talks about the acronym SLIS and how that name is used by universities. I would change that lead info to link to the Education for Librarianship page.
• There are three large indented sections of quoted material. According to the Wikipedia training, this is not the preferred way to include information, so I would update to indicate what the information states in my own words and then link to the cited resource.
• There are statistics listed on dissertation use of the term from 2009 and 2011. I would try to update this information to more recent statistics.
• There is some information that does not seem neutral, and does not contain citations relating to the information presented. I would either add "citation needed" or remove/rephrase. For example:
  • " Library schools have mainly educated librarians for public libraries and not shown much interest in scientific communication and documentation."
  • The whole 'documentation science' paragraph seems to be missing reference/citation information