User:Adgillis1/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: MacBride report
 * I have chosen this article because I had previously never heard of the MacBride report, and because the initial lead sentence of the article seemed to be discussing something quite intriguing regarding the issue of problems in communication.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, it includes a brief sentence naming the subject, detailing its year of publication, and explaining who created the report.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, it describes the general premise and subject of the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, most of the Lead is focused on information that is not referred to again in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is perhaps overly detailed in that it contains a significant amount of information only present in the lead, with the article having very limited substance beyond that.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article's content is directly relevant to the topic of the MacBride report.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content contains up-to-date information on the subject.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Due to the focus of the article being a list, it seems that there may be content missing from the focus and subject of the report.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article is neutral despite presenting descriptions of public reaction.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are no claims that seem to be out of order regarding the report.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, the viewpoints of the report and its response seem to both be fairly represented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, the article makes no attempt to persuade the reader in either direction.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it is concise and easy to follow.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No, the article seems to have no errors in grammar or spelling.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Beyond the lead, the article only has sections regarding "The MacBride Commission" and one link section. Due to this, I would assess that it is missing probably fundamental information and sections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are no conversations or messages left on this page's talk page.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a part of the WikiProjects for both "United Nations" and "Media." It has also not been assessed for rating.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not talked about this topic in class specifically, and in addition there is no discussion regarding the article on its talk page.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's overall status is fair, but there are major improvements that could be made.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article remains unbiased throughout and does not make a major positive or negative push regarding its subject.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * There is very limited content beyond the lead, consisting mostly of a list related to the report's commission, and it could stand to have any sort of image or media.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I would say that the article is slightly underdeveloped due to its brevity, especially in discussion of an academic report submitted to UNESCO in addition to allusions to censorship regarding the report.

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: