The FIP Philatelic Web Site Evaluations

The Evaluation Scheme
used by the "Evaluators"

Title or Description: Entry No.:
Site URL:http://
Site looked at on:Date Time : Local:or GMT:

Character of opening screen: (e.g., friendly with information about the site and what's on it; navigational assistance, need to do something else to access the real site's real first page, or a puzzle of what to do to access any real information; dazzling display of confusing and distracting animations.):



In the body of the evaluation form, there are four sections, each with an elaboration concerning their application to an electronic presentation. As follows:

Treatment of contents - 40%
This is the Authorship: How well is the material presented? How clear and well-expressed? Are the different sections easy to find? Can one navigate easily from one main section to another? Are graphics used well? How suitable is the technology - not how fancy it is, but rather how well it is suited to the content? Is the site user-friendly? How useful and pertinent are the links?

How clear is presentation?

(Clear)8 7654321(Muddled)
Is navigation between pages easy?(Easy)87654321(Hard)
Is technology applied well in respect to content?(Well)87654321(Poorly)
Are graphics used well and intelligently?(Well)87654321(Poorly)
Are links useful and up to date?(All Current)87654321(Many old)

Originality, significance, depth of research - 40%
Philatelic Content: How significant is this site philatelically? How useful is it as a reference, or as a specialty guide, or for teaching or training? If the material is not original, is there proper attribution given to the sources? Is the information kept up to date? And a final question, if the site were no longer available, how greatly would it be missed?

How important philatelically?(Very)87654321(Little)
How useful is content for intended audience?(Very)87654321(Little)
Is content original or copied from other sites?(Original)87654321(Copied)
Is site updated regularly?(Frequently)87654321(Never)
If not available, how much would it be missed?(A lot)87654321(Not at all)

Technical matters - 15%
This is the Editing area and generally covers the "housekeeping" functions. Is the identification and e-mail address of the webmaster easy to find? How easily can one tell who actually sponsors the site? Are the links kept up to date? If material has been copied from somewhere else, is there proper attribution? How well is the site laid out? Are the dates of posting or updating the information easily located?

Are Webmaster contact details easy to find?(Yes)10(No)
Is date of last update noted?(Yes)10(No)
Is layout consistent between pages?(Consistent)654321(Variable)
Has colour been used appropriately?(Tasteful) 7654321(Gaudy)

Presentation - 5%
This covers the "Publishing" aspect and the overall esthetic appeal of the site. Web sites should not be bloated with excessive graphics that slow the loading time down to a crawl. Is there clutter due to advertising from the service that is hosting the site? Some of the services that offer free web site hosting can be sources of this detraction from the intent of the web site.

Are adverts/banners from site host excluded?(Yes)10(No)
Overall 'first impression' of site(Excellent)4321(Poor)
Grand Total:  
Award: 90-100 points: Top 5%. 80-89 points: 3 Star. 70-79 points: 2 Star. Under 70 points: Certificate