User:A hern8/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: Industrial Arts (Industrial arts)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This topic was recently discussed in one of my other classes.

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.
 * 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 overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? No.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There are a few citations missing.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Not as it’s currently written. These are topics that are repeatedly being discussed within society.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes. Different topics within Industrial Arts are being discussed evenly.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No. Everything is being discussed evenly
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Yes. It persuades the reader that industrial arts is an important aspect in everyday society and schools.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No. A few souces are missing for a few facts being represented.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they do.
 * Are the sources current? No. It's from 2017.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No.
 * 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? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No.
 * Are images well-captioned? There are no images.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There are no images.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There are no images.

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 behind the scenes.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is not rated the best. It doesn't have good sources.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The way Wikipedia discusses this topic I straight forward with citations. The way we discuss it in class is with a deeper meaning and point of view of how it works within society and environment.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Overall status is underdeveloped.
 * What are the article's strengths? Poor.
 * How can the article be improved?  The article can be improved by providing well cited ciations and images.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The 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: