User:Sergiowallsergio/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: Alveolo-palatal consonant (Alveolo-palatal consonant)
- I haven chosen to evaluate this article because it relates to what I am learning in my linguistics class.
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 does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes what the article's topic is. The Lead does include a brief summary about the topic after the introductory sentence, but it does not have to do with the article's major sections. That information that is included, does not really show up in the rest of the article. It is hard to distinguish the difference between concise and overly detailed if a person does not know anything about linguistics and this topic in specific. Although, I do believe that the introductory is just a bit over detailed because they could create a section for some of what was included in the Lead.
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 article's content is very relevant to the topic. As far as I can tell, the content is up-to-date. There is not much content that seems to be missing or does not belong. I believe that it deals with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps because it is about linguistics.
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]There is a sentence in the Lead that seems like it is an assumption, but the article is very neutral. They do not seem biased towards a particular position and they reference any differing statements.
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 facts in the Lead are backed by a reliable source of information as they use sources dealing with Linguistics. The following sections that contain examples of the consonant in different languages is not referenced by any source though. Of the two sources that are used, one is older while the other is much more recent. The sources do not seem to be written by a diverse spectrum of authors, but the links in the article work.
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 Lead of the article could be more concise and easier to read. The rest of the article is clear and easy to read though. The article is free from grammatical and spelling errors and it is organized well. There could be another topic for some of the information that is contained in the Lead, but it is fine for the most part.
Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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 does include images and tables that help with understanding the topic. And although there are no direct audio provided, it contains many links to the things related to this topic. All the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations and are captioned well. There is only one image though, and it is not the best one to describe 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]There are a few conversations going on about adding some material and changing some of the current information. The talks happening are very few though. The article is related to Wiki Projects Linguistics. The article does not fundamentally differ from the way we have talked about this consonant in class.
Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- tatus?
- 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]The article's overall status is C-class according to Wikipedia. I believe that the article is good overall, but could use some adjustments to make it really good. The article is very neutral and states the information in a clear and concise way for the most part. The article could be improved by references sources for the major section information and by adjusting the Lead so that it is easier to understand. There could be more images present and the ones chosen could do better at helping the audience to understand the article's topic.
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: