User:Eric1997uw/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: NCAA Football 2005
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: This is a stub article that I am considering using for the more extensive work in this class. I would like to be able to fully evaluate this article in order to understand if this is a good artifact to use in this class. I also have personal experience with this series of games in the past.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes. It explains what It is, who made It, and when It was released.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- It contains a listing of the article's major sections however there is not any more than that. There is really only two "major" sections in this article (gameplay and features).
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- The lead includes information on the cover of the game but that is never revisited in the later parts of the article. This is notable considering the cover featured the then Pittsburg wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald. He is a huge star with a hall of fame career and is most likely one of his first major moments in the press.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- The lead is overall concise. No topic drags on for longer than a sentence.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Everything is relevant to the topic. However the bulk of the information in the main sections is about one feature of gameplay (Home field advantage), and not much more.
Is the content up-to-date?
- Yes, not much information on these games has been released or learned since 2005.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Ideally more information on the in game play would be included in this.

Is the article neutral?
- This article is neutral, however there aren't many parts of this article that would easily be a debatable topic.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Nope, the reception of the game is said to be very high but that is based on outside reviews that are correctly cited and displayed.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- There is a lot of talk about only one feature of the game, however there is a list of many features that aren't expanded upon.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- Nope, simply, fact based information about a video game.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes all facts are either cited from the creators of the game (EA) or popular and credible video game websites.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- For the most part yes, however there is still a lot of sources attached to the sole feature that was expanded upon (as I mentioned above)
Are the sources current?
- Sources seem to range from 2004 to 2015, all seem up to date.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes all work.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes, quite concise. A fairly simple article, so yes, easy to read.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Not that I can find!
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes, other than the lopsided amount of content for features, there are clear titles and sections.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Only one image, the cover of the game. No in game footage.
Are images well-captioned?
- Simple Jpeg of the cover of the game, no caption attached.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Yes I believe so.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- Only one photo so yes, however could be more appealing to view more photos as you read.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- There are no current conversations taking place.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- Yes It is a part of the College Football portal and the Video Games portal.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

What is the article's overall status?
- It has the basic information, however is not very expansive and hasn't been touched in a very long time.
What are the article's strengths?
- The facts are well said and well cited. Written smoothly, and includes interesting details.
How can the article be improved?
- More content on other features of the game and more image, especially in-game images.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- It is underdeveloped. It has a good amount of information as is, however It could certainly use some tweaking.

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 — ~~~~