User:150664j/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: Roman Economy
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. A general interest in economics, as well as taking a greater look into the slavery model of early Rome, debt bonds, and trading.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it identifies the main focus of the topic and what it was largely made up of.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major section? Not really it only mentions a few major categories.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes there are several instances of the article mentioning things not present as focus points.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Fairly concise but is a bit rambly

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes all topics relate to the economy
 * Is the content up-to-date? mostly, some sources are out of date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? all content is relevant, but topics such as slavery do not exist

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes, it is not opinionated
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, not from what i can tell
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? yes, the source list is quite extensive
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? the sources seem to be poorly listed and most do not work
 * Are the sources current? several are out of date but most seem current
 * Check a few links. Do they work? no, most do not work

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes it is well written
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? there seems to be a few grammar issues and run on sentances
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes it is well organized

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes the images are fine
 * Are images well-captioned? yes they have great detail
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? im not sure
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes they are evenly spaced

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? most are about the lack of topics such as slavery and income.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? it is rated S and is the subject of a wiki course assignment
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? it lacks topics mainly

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Needs more topics, improved grammer, and better sources
 * What are the article's strengths? Written well (apart from some grammer issues, alot of sources, and non-biased
 * How can the article be improved? include slavery, fix lead, properly source articles
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? underdeveloped, it is a good base and is definitely not a poor article.

Optional activity

 * 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: