User:BenKeebaugh/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: (link) Adam Goodes
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- I chose this article because I am an Australian citizen and Australian Rules Football is my favourite sport. Adam Goodes is a hero of mine, he was an elite Australian Rules Football player who overcame many forms of discrimination, as he indigenous, whilst he was playing football within Australia. I chose this article because discrimination articles can have emotive language, I am interested to analyse how the editors write about his career and his injustices.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
Lead evaluation
[edit]The lead does include and introductory sentence and clearly describes that the article is about Adam Goodes and his career. The lead paragraph does a great job of emphasising the importance components throughout the article. There is no information in the article that is not relevant or not present throughout the entire article. Finally, the lead is short, sharp and concise.
Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Is the content up-to-date?
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Content evaluation
[edit]The articles content is relevant to the topic. However, it lacks a clarity into Adam Goodes's individuals successes on the field. The article directly speaks about his racial vilification and his media instigation with a 13 year old girl, who yelled racial slurs at him during a game of football. The article's content is up to date, as Adam retired from football September 2015 and all relevant sources are slotted between 2015 and 2020. There should be more content focused on his leadership within the Sydney Swans, moreover, his three way tie Brownlow medal victory.
Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article neutral?
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]The tone in the article is neutral, it provides a well balance voice throughout the entire page. There are claims about Adam's tribunal selection, which differ from the merit of the article, however, within the subheading they provide both perspectives from the accused and the accuser. The tribunal is where athletes get punishments for unsportsman like conduct on the field. There are viewpoints that direct a negative attitude towards the Australian media, as to the way they represented Adam throughout his career. They highlight the adjectives with the way journalists would phrase his athletic ability, for example, aggressive and erratic. The article attempts to persuade Adam Goodes as a victim of the system, where he has felt injustices throughout all levels of the game. Whereas, Adam Goodes was one of the highest paid athletes in Australia and received multiple awards within AFL for his social, environmental and physical successes.
Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Are the sources current?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]All facts are backed up with credible secondary source information. Everything from his game play data, to his overall career. All sources are click through to relevant and readable links backed up by a credible firm. All sources span a time frame from 2009 to 2020.
Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Organization evaluation
[edit]The article is extremely well-written both with no apparent punctuation or grammatical errors. The layout is extremely well organised and extremely easy to read and navigate through. Finally, the subheadings make the read direct and concise.
Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Are images well-captioned?
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
Images and media evaluation
[edit]There are four images within the article, all displaying different aspect of Adam's career. Firstly, his biographic image is him in a suit, mid range shot with the aboriginal flag in the background. The second image is Adam playing a football game in 2006. Thirdly, Adam doing a victory lap after his 2012 grand final win. Finally, Adam speaking to the media about a racial slur allegation. All images are relevant to the section of he article and are extremely well captioned. All images are laid out visually appealing and all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Talk page evaluation
[edit]The conversations behind the scenes are extremely informative. For example, if a section could have more relevant information, former editors will pass on expansion opportunities and guide the criticism with warmth versus direct assertion. The article is rated as C-class and of low importance. Wikipedia is much more factual and disregards emotions In class, we speak about collective engagement versus individual.
Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status?
- What are the article's strengths?
- How can the article be improved?
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
Overall evaluation
[edit]The article's overall status is extremely thorough and factual. There is a neutral tone throughout the majority of the article and the voice is relatively unbiased. The article's strengths are that the sources are credible and click through to relevant and reputable sites. The imagery is visually aesthetic and the captions are all relevant. The article could talk more about Adam's successes in his career and expand more on the encounter will the racial slur allegations from the 13 year old Australian girl. I would assess the completeness o the article as well developed.
Optional activity
[edit]- Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback
with four tildes — ~~~~
- Link to feedback: