User:Muneuro/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: Utopian studies
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate-- I have chosen this article to evaluate as I found the topic to be interesting. I do not know much about Utopian studies, so I though it would be an interesting exercise.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Somewhat, it has an outline.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise but it is not very detailed.

The content has a lot of links, but it would benefit from some descriptions of the books and people which it talks about.

Is the article neutral? There are not may words, so yes.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it does not provide much information at all.

There is not much text in the page, so there is not much to evaluate tone-wise.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
Are the sources current? Somewhat.
Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

There are many outside sources, and they work well. They seem to be a good source for readers to learn more about the topic.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? There are not many words, so no.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Each subtopic could benefit from a couple of sentences which explain the sources.

The page could benefit from some images which give the reader another form of media to understand the topic.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There are questions about the validity of the sources.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? I could not find a place that shows the article's rating on the talk pace. I do not believe that it is a part of any WikiProjects.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There does not seem to be much about anything on the talk page. There are minimal edits and comments on the talk page.

Not much on the talk page, no one seems to be working on it.

What is the article's overall status? Not great.
What are the article's strengths? Lots of links.
How can the article be improved? More general information about the topic.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Poorly developed.

The article could greatly benefit from more overall general information . The links are good to lead to other topics.

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 — ~~~~