Jump to content

User:Salthedoughboy/Evaluate an Article

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Evaluating an article

[edit]

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

  • Linguistic Anthropology: (Linguistic anthropology)
  • I've chosen to work on this article because it is the topic of the class.

Lead

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • The Lead describes the overall topic of the article.
  • The Lead does provide a description of the article's major section.
  • The Lead includes information that is not present in the article. It has linked pages and citations.
  • The Lead is concise and very clear on the topic of the article.

Lead evaluation

[edit]

Content

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • The article's content is relevant to the topic. It has multiple citations to other Linguistic ideas.
  • The content is up to date, being last edited on October 2, 2019.
  • There is no content that is out of date or that is irrelevant.

Content evaluation

[edit]

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 over-represented, or underrepresented?
  • Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation

[edit]

Sources and References

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • The facts in the article are comprised through credible second hand sources.
  • The sources are credible and thorough.
  • The sources are current as the
  • All of the links work on the page and the pages linked worked as well.

Sources and references evaluation

[edit]

Organization

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • The article is well-written and concise. There is no obvious spelling errors or grammatical errors.
  • It does not have any obvious spelling errors
  • It is well organized. It has multiple sections that describes different parts of the articles specifics.

Organization evaluation

[edit]

Images and Media

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • There are no images involved
  • Not Available
  • Not Available
  • The images are not laid out in a visually appealing way.

Images and media evaluation

[edit]

Checking the talk page

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • The conversations involved about the article talk about the academic language used. The jargon and language is hard to follow for the readers.
  • The article is rated as C-level. It is a part of 4 different WikiProjects.
  • Wikipedia discusses it in a more academic manner, as in class we've talked about the logistics and semantics of the sub-field of Anthropology.

Talk page evaluation

[edit]

Overall impressions

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • the article is growing and still being changed currently.
  • The great part about this article is the academic jargon being used.
  • It can be created with less academic terms to make it easier to understand for the general public.
  • The article is well composed and completed. It contains everything from citations to link to second hand sources.

Overall evaluation

[edit]