User:Djasin/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: Interpersonal communication
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- I have taken an Interpersonal communications class in the past so I have an understanding in the background of it. Because of this, I wanted to see what information a wiki article about interpersonal communication had The article itself seems well written with a good amount of information and little fluff. It seems very concise and to the point. Not only that but is well organized.
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 first sentence is a definition of interpersonal communication. The lead contains four paragraphs explaining the basics of interpersonal communication without going too far in depth. The lead sets the reader with a proper background of what to expect in the article. The briefly covers the main points to be seen in the article. The lead doesn't mention anything that can not be found later in the article. The lead balances between being short but still having the appropriate amount of information that can be found in the article.
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 article is very focused on the information and does not stray. It covers a lot of information and does so by only covering the essentials. The page was edited within the last two months so it is still up-to-date. All information looks appropriate and like it is in the right place. There is no information that looks like it does not belong.
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 article shows no bias. It is neutral in its approach. There are no claims for a heavily biased opinion as the article reports everything objectively. All view points have a, appropriate amount of sentences to summarize it. Each viewpoint is briefly explained without dragging out the point.
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]The article has 74 references and and 16 cites, even mentioning additional reading to follow up with. All sources are legitimate and bring information to the article. The oldest is from 1958 but still sounds relevant. The links do work. Each source and cite add credibility to the article.
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 very well organized and has a good rhythm. The article is very professional with no mistakes. There are no grammatical or spelling errors that I could find. The article extremely well organized. This makes it very easy to read. Every subject is broken down with bullet points and bold to make sure it is easy to read.
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 only five images for the large article and they don't necessarily add too much. The article lacks in images that add value to the content. The images adhere to the copyright regulations. They have captions that explain the images and their importance to the article. The images are laid out on the side and stay out of the way of the information. They visually do not add much to the article.
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 article has over 500 edits on it since being made.
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 is very strong and professional with lots of helpful information. The strength is the amount of information included. The images could be better. The article is well-developed and shows an active community keeping it up to date. It is a relevant article that is very helpful.
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: