User:SeanRichardson.3/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: American Collegiate Rowing Association
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen to evaluate this article because I currently compete on the rowing team here at UMass and we normally compete at the ACRA every season. Moreover, the article is pretty skimpy in detail and I believe there could be much more information added to it in order to make it professional and thorough.

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? No, only has one sentence and no information about the members or past champions.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is very concise but not very informative, as it is only one sentence long.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
Is the content up-to-date? No, the champions/members list isn't updated.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There needs to be more content in the history and previous champions sections and other additional sections, such as: eligibility, individual awards, equity and headquarters.
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Is the article neutral? Yes
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Each section doesn't have much depth to it.
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? No, almost all of the information is coming from the ACRA official website.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? No, the only source is the ACRA website.
Are the sources current? Yes
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No to both.
Check a few links. Do they work? Two of the them do and one doesn't.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? No, it's not informative, up to date, or diverse at all and only uses one source.
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, but there could be more information in each section and more sections.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No, there are no photos, only graphics of oars for each years champion in the Varsity 8+ category.
Are images well-captioned? There are no images or captions used for the graphic.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Graphics for the Varsity 8+ champions are a nice addition and well put together.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There have been no conversations.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It has not been rated.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There are no conversations that have occurred on this page so it isn't applicable to this particular page.

What is the article's overall status? Weak, needs more data and to be updated. Also, needs a diverse cast of sources and not just one from the ACRA website.
What are the article's strengths? Solid members and champions list.
How can the article be improved? Add more sections, update, more sources, and a section about the diversity and equity efforts of the ACRA.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped.

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 — ~~~~