User:Naiimah45/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: Audio-Animatronics
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- I chose this article because I am very interested in and know a lot about audio animatronics
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 describes what the article's focus is by offering a definition of audio animations. The lead dose not describe the articles major sections and is not overly detailed or 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]All of the content posted was relevant to the topic and up to date. There were no pieces of information that were out of place in the article.
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 of the article is very neutral. Its main purpose is to provide information and dosn't have any points where it is trying to persuade readers one way or another.
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]There are a few sources cited for this text, although there are very few inline citations. The links for the citations still work but the citations themselves are all blogs which can be taken as less credible.
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 organizational structure this article follows is intuitive and easy to understand. The sections it is broken down into represents the major points of the topic.
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]The images are well captioned and well laid out but the pictures and all relate to the topic but don't seem to follow the copyright laws
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 on the talk page includes questions about whether or not certain information should be included in this article as well as corrections to content and spelling.This article is rated as start class and is a part of the Amusement park Wiki Projects.
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]Overall this article is seems to be missing some information.The largest improvement that needs to be made to this article is the addition of inline citations. This article could definitely use more development.
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: