User:AIMustafa/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: White-booted racket-tail
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * A few months ago, I looked up this bird and found there was little information on Wikipedia on it. When I went back to look at it today, I found that about a month ago someone has improved the article, so I decided to evaluate the new version of this article.

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?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise

Content

 * 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?
 * More content can be added, for example, what does is eat?

Tone and Balance

 * 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?
 * 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
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Maybe not?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes the links work

Organization

 * 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?
 * Aside from the lead there is only one section. But the information within this section is appropriate.

Images and Media

 * 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?
 * I assume so?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

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 conversations are going on
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article is part of three WikiProjects: WikiProject Ecuador, WikiProject Venezuela, and WikiProject Birds.
 * It is rated stub-class, and in birds, it is also rated low importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * N/A- this topic was not discussed in class

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * This article gives very basic information, but is not enough to be able to sufficiently describe it others.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It describes two important features when describing an animal: its description and taxonomic information.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * This article can be improved by adding more detail about this hummingbird. For example, what is its diet mostly comprised of, or describing the differences that lead to different species or subspecies and provide more detail on that.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Article is underdeveloped.

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: Talk:White-booted racket-tail