User:Bellsam4/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

Name of article: Bear claw (pastry)
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: This pastry is something that I've grown up eating at my grandmother's house so there is a sentimental aspect to it. As well as being mid-importance and lacking information, I thought it would be a good fit.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes there is an introductory sentence that is clear and concise.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, within there is not a clear description of what the sections are within the article.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, the article includes all information that is present in the article.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I would say the Lead is concise and could potentially use slightly more detail.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes all the content directly relates back to the bear claw itself. Nothing strays far from the content.
Is the content up-to-date? Most of the sources sited are four (or more) years old as with comments in the "Talk" channel. I would say that it is not out dated, but could use additional information.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is not content that doesn't belong. I do think there is some content missing such as geographically where it originated, companies that produce this pastry, and more details on how it is made by hand or machines.
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? I don't believe this article deals with on of Wikipedia's equity gaps or relate to underrepresented populations or topics.

Is the article neutral? Yes, this article is neutral. In the talk there is some discussion of opinion about wether it is considered a breakfast food or not.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No claims are heavily biased toward a particular position.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No viewpoints are either overrepresented or underrepresented.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No there is no persuasion within this article.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? All the facts are backed up by sources, but some are not as reliable as I would prefer. One source is from AllRecipes.com which I'm not sure is reliable.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes the sources are thorough and provide the necessary information in the article from the literature.
Are the sources current? The sources are slightly outdated a couple of years.
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The sources provided are diverse seeing as some are recipes and some are dictionaries and journals.
Check a few links. Do they work? The links do work.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Very concise and easy to read through.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No grammatical or spelling errors.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Even though there isn't much information, the facts provided are well organized.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Only one image is used to show what the pastry looks like. I do believe more photos could be added to help portray how it is made or factories that produce it and so on.
Are images well-captioned? No photos are used within the article, so they do not have captions.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes the one photo adheres to Wikipedia's regulations.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No additional images are provided, meaning there isn't much that is appealing visually.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? One conversation that are going on behind the scenes is wether or not this pastry is considered a breakfast food or not. As well as if it is considered a fritter or just a pastry. Much of the conversations are related to the category a bear claw falls under.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is rated mid-importance and is apart/in scope of the WikiProject Breakfast.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The most major difference between this page and how we have been discussing Wikipedia is lack of discussion on the page itself. This is an article that doesn't have much interaction so less discussion is a pitfall from that. Also we have mentioned how Wikipedia is a source of information, but when looking at this page there are basics but not detail facts to help further knowledge on the topic.

What is the article's overall status? Overall, this stub page is at a good place to continue work on it. I would say it has most of the basics but could be elaborated on further. It has just enough foundation, but room to be improved upon.
What are the article's strengths? The article being very clear and concise thus far is one of its strengths. It is easy to follow and never gets overly complicated. That is something that I would want continue if I add to this page.
How can the article be improved? I do think this article can be improved. Some additional information about where it originates, step by step processes of how to hand make it, facts of how it is processed in factories, and more photos to accompany this new information.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? This article is underdeveloped because there are some citations that need more verification and overall additional information to be provided. However, I don't believe it is poorly developed in any way.
-~~~~