User:Aarongg20/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: Astronomy & Astrophysics
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: Because I thought it was related to class.

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? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Overly detailed

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? conversation is up to date but the content not so much.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? missing
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Does not deal with equity gap and does not address underrepresented topic.

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? Few underrepresented.
 * 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? No it states the book is prominent in its category with no actual data for that statement.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? No
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, It's about a book so no marginalization.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? No it makes statements as fact with no citations to back it up.
 * 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? It is to short, with a few sentences within each of the 7 sections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes the book cover.
 * 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? No.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Conversation over stated fact that has no citation.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? it is rated as a C-class article with level 5 vitality.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We didn't talk about it in class yet.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It's incomplete.
 * What are the article's strengths? Multiple contributors.
 * How can the article be improved? More information needs to be added about the book.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Super poor;y 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: