User:205.175.106.11/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: The LaSallian
 * I wasn't sure which article I wanted to select so I clicked on "random article" and this article appeared.

I am very familiar with working this type of compound and feel qualified to evaluate this subject material.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes. The sentence describes the official student publication of De La Salle University, under the Student Media Office.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes. It is an overview of the most essential information on the topic.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes. It includes a lot of relevant information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise with a reasonable amount of information.

Lead evaluation
This is an overall good lead.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes. The content is all about this student publication.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes this includes new information on the topic
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No. All the information is relevant to the topic

Content evaluation
Content in this article is appropriate and on-topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, it does not provide opinions. Only facts.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, no such claims appear to be made.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented.
 * No, viewpoints are well balanced.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, this article is very informational.

Tone and balance evaluation
Generally well toned and balanced with some challenging word choice questions.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No
 * Are the sources current?
 * No
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Poor

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes but there were a lot of words, names, and etc... that people are not familiar with
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * None that I've found.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes.

Organization evaluation
Overall good

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes but it could be better
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Sure
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * As far as I can tell.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

Images and media evaluation
Overall good.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * No discussions
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * No
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * None.

Talk page evaluation
Severally lacking

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall good, but need more citations and sources
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Very organized
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Cite the sources
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Decently well developed but need more credibility

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: