User:Nrc99/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: United States Census
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- The U.S. census plays an important part in determining demographics, which is especially important in urban areas. Not to mention, it is a census year.
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 is short but also informative. Much of it talks about the 2020 Census, notably the fact that this is the first census that can be completed by Internet. The concise nature of the lead coupled with important historical facts is informative.
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?
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
Content evaluation
[edit]The content clearly overviews the history of the census, and is up to date. I like how the article lists links to every individual census which helps the organization of the article. The controversy section covers census issues that disproportionally affect underrepresented groups, such as the 2018-19 citizenship question.
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]For the most part the article is neutral. One area that I noticed that could raise eyebrows is the controversy section. The section covers two controversies, Trump interference and 2018-19 Citizenship question. Obviously the controversy here is up to the reader but it is important to point these out. However, I am curious to know if there are any other important controversies that the article did not go over, such as other historical or current controversies.
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?
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]The sources are strong sources, many of which are directly from government websites and are very recent. However, the sources are balanced between government, authors, and other cources. After clicking on a few sources, I was able to read even more into the topic.
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 well-organized, and even though there are many ways that it could have been organized depending on the writer, it is easy and clear 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]The article includes images, videos, and maps that enhance my understanding of the topic.
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 talk page brings up points by the writers such as the use of the word "illegal" immigrant and the capitalization of Census.
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]While this is a solid article it could definitely use some more information. While it talks a lot about the details of the Census, it could include more history, However, with the number of individual Census articles, I am not sure how much overlap between the general U.S. Census and individual Censuses there should be.
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: