Research article,gives history about the wiki and lot of information. It looks more like developed form a research model. Seminal look at how the wiki system works, is used.
The references give some information about from where the author got the information.The sources provided helps the reader in getting more information on the topic and it even helps in justifying the authors point.It even show that the author refered so and so material to get to this conclusion.taking others paper and apply for the current.
The overview points listed on page 2 led me to think that he is going to explain all the topics listed in the same manner as on the index.
The figures are incomplete.the figures on page 3 does not provide the details regarding them.The figures should only provide aditional information regarding the details he provides.
thesis:Not clear.The author should state his thesis properly.The thesis is left to readers to guess what he is saying.The clearity is lacking. The author measures the quality of Wiki by the number of people visiting ,the total number of edits for an article.but doesnot support his point clearly.
He provides a lot of history regarding the wiki,how it evolved,how to work ,why it evolved, The authors compares the wiki to some other software.
Methodology:too amny things going on.two variables he refers,rigor and density.the number of edits made are counted to rate the wiki..but if any person made it wrong the corection made is also counted as a visit. He uses the comparision of the group.the relaibility of the source.historical trends how people interact.