User:Uxelav/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: Geology#:~:text=Geology (from the Ancient Greek,which they change over time.
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Currently one of the classes I am taking
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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? Yes
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Detailed
Lead evaluation
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
- Is the content up-to-date? Yes
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No
Content evaluation
[edit]Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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? There aren't any that are overrepresented or underrepresented
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?Yes
- Are the sources current? Yes
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? They include diverse authors and individuals
- Check a few links. Do they work? Yes
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
- 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
Organization evaluation
[edit]Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
- Are images well-captioned? Yes
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes
Images and media evaluation
[edit]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? No conversations
- 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? It is more general
Talk page evaluation
[edit]Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status?
- What are the article's strengths? It covers a wide range of topics
- How can the article be improved? More details
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Well developed
Overall evaluation
[edit]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: