User:Ajsche/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: (link) Link: Mountain
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. --- I think learning about geology is cool and I thought I would enjoy this article alot

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does contain a lead that clearly and concisely describes the topic of mountains which is the article of the topic
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?- Yes this does have a brief description of the articles major selections
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes the largest mountain in the solar system Olympus Mons on mars
 * 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 the articles content is relevant
 * Is the content up-to-date? ---yes the content is up to date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?- No there is no content that doesn't belong

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?- Yes this article is neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? --No there is no claims that are biased at all
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?-- I feel like everything has been adequately represented
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?--No yhis article does not persuade you one way or another

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? --- Yes they are all backed up with a source of information
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?--- They do represent the topic they are all about the topic
 * Are the sources current?--- The all are current and up to date
 * 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?-- The article is well written
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?-- I have not noticed any grammatical mistakes
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?--- Yes it is well organized

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes the article includes images to enhance understanding
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes there are captions for the pictures
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes they all adhere to the copy right regulations
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yeah they are laid out in a visually appealing way

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? They want to add different categories
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? -- It is rated as a C class and it is part of the wiki projects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?- It isnt any different

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is still getting edited
 * What are the article's strengths? The article strengths is the accuracy of the information on it
 * How can the article be improved? It could include more types of mountains and more categories
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? This is well-developed and has room for improvement

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: