User:16mslack/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: Talk:Algae
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Algae has many impacts on humans and I was curious to see what the general consensus on Algae was.

Lead

 * 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, there are quick links to the various main topics discussed within the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Discussions of other sources takes place with links to those sources. So information is indirectly given.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The first little paragraph is concise, but seems to run on just a little long. I would probably add a little of what is stated to the other sections.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * All of the content is relevant to the topic, yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Much of this article's contents are edited within the last 5 years at least so I would say that it is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The article seems very well rounded and all information is relevant to the topic.

Content evaluation
Not as much content as I was expecting. Many links to other Algae articles, however, so maybe you would need to be more specific when using Wikipedia as your source of info.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The Article does seem balanced to me. There is not just one user dominating the article.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, all of the different sections seem to be very neutral if biased at all.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * the physiology and relationship to land plant sections seem to be very short. While sections such as the classification seem to be very complex.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Not that I noticed.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * There are a plethora of cited sources to many universities and scholarly articles so I would say yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, there is a direct link to all other articles referenced.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most sources are within the last 10 years and studies of marine biology is rather new to the equation so yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All links that I clicked on worked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Very concise, easy to read. I enjoyed it.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Properly spell checked. The talk page not so much, but the actual page is well written.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * All topics are discussed only in their designated sections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * When available yes. Good pictures too, not fuzzy or confusing to look at.
 * 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?
 * Very easy to see why they are relevant to the sections.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * People curious about some of the sources concerning books that are used as references. Otherwise not much.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * I do not see a rating, but it is part of a wikiproject.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't really discussed Algae in class yet, but it seems to be a brief overview of the algae, rather than how we go into more detail with various bacteria.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is good.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * I would say that the strength is very obviously the characterizing of Algae.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I would add more to even out the sections rather than have some very long and some very short sections.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * There have been many revisions and past versions to this article so I would say that it is very well developed.

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: