User:Acw235/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: New Girl (season 1)
 * I am interested in this show and have too much knowledge on it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the Lead includes an introductory sentence and describes the topic of the article.
 * 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? No, it is concise.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise and is not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Not as up-to-date as possible.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There could be more added, for example, I would argue that a major character is missing from the introductory paragraph where the main characters are introduced.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No.

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? Since it's a TV show, there are probably many unknown viewpoints.
 * 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? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes.
 * 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? 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? One, yes.
 * 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? 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? Mainly about what should be mentioned in the episode list.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is part of five projects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There is a lot a change most go through before being published.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is pretty strong, There's a lot of information.
 * What are the article's strengths? The episodes are summarized well, not too detailed but structured.
 * How can the article be improved? Some episode summaries might be a bit too heavy in information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? 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: