User:Jagani.ayman/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: Microfinance
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- I have chosen this article to evaluate because I feel very interested in this topic, and I think that there could be additional information in this article.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes, it clearly states the article's topic and defines it concisely.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- No it does not include it, it just covers microfinance in a more general sense, and then flows with the next sections elaborating further.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- No, most of the information is covered later on in subsections.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- It is concise and covers the big idea.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes very, it addresses it from many angles.
Is the content up-to-date?
- Yes, it is pretty up to date, but could use more recent case studies.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- All content belongs, but could use more case studies in other regions of the world.

Is the article neutral?
- Yes it is neutral.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- No, all claims are objective and unbiased.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- No, it seems very equally represented.
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
  - No.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes, but can use more sources or utilize certain sources further.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes, but should be used more than just for a couple points.
Are the sources current?
- Yes.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes they do work.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes, it is very easy to read.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- I did not see any, but in the talk page a few were pointed out and fixed.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes, well designed and flows well.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- There are some images, but they do not necessarily aid understanding but more so to just illustrate the text.
Are images well-captioned?
- Yes, the captions are direct and in depth.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Yes.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- They are just off to the side, but I think that was the best placement for them considering they are not diagrams nor crucial to understanding.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- This topic is currently being merged with the Financial Inclusion Article. Some critiques are that this article was too technical for a beginner read, and that there was not enough introduction before jumping into the details. There were also some comments of contradictions, but those have since been corrected.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- It is rated as a start-class mid to high importance, and is part of 4 wiki projects.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- No, it is objective and non-biased.

What is the article's overall status?
- I think the article is pretty good, and that it provides enough information, but could be edited further to be easier to read and could use the addition of more basic info before addressing deeper information.
What are the article's strengths?
- It provides a lot of details and synthesizes view points from many sources, as this topic is heavily discussed and argued upon.
How can the article be improved?
- It can be improved by adding more basic background information, and adding more case studies as well as recent events.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- I think this article is well developed, just a few minor additions are needed.

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 — ~~~~