User:Albeiticeboxsherbetpailfulpushcartbrusque/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: Elizabeth Peabody Elizabeth Peabody
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because Elizabeth Palmer Peabody wrote one of the readings for week two of our class. I had looked her up to get context for the reading, and she is interesting, so I chose to evaluate her article.

Lead

 * Guiding question


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it describes who Peabody was and why she is important.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Not really, in the sense that they are not clearly explained in the lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, the information from the lead is in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is fairly concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the content describes Peabody's life and her important works and acts.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes, insofar as Peabody died in 1894, the article is not missing relevant information on Peabody's life.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? As far as I can tell the article is not missing content.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? The article deals with a woman, and women are underrepresented in terms of history, so yes, it deals with an equity gap.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The article is neutral - it doesn't contain personal opinions.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? It doesn't seem like there are claims that are biased towards one position or the other.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There do not seem to viewpoints that fit in either category.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, the article is neutral and doesn't try to persuade the reader - it simply presents some facts about Peabody's life.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? There are some facts that do not have a citation, and thus are not reliably backed up.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources that are cited seem thorough and reflect the available literature.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, the sources range in date from the 19th century to less than 5 years ago.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The sources are certainly temporally diverse; it is hard to tell how diverse the spectrum of authors represented is, but there are women authors included and these are an underrepresented group.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, the links that I clicked all worked/

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is decently written; it could expand a few areas though.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? The article doesn't seem to have any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The article is well organized, with sections for the different parts of Peabody's life.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, the article includes a couple images which add context to it.
 * Are images well-captioned? The image captions are simple, but they do describe the contents of the images.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? The images do adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, the images are formatted to fit well with the article text.

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 aren't any back and forth conversations on the topic, although a few individuals did bring up points of question.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is C class and is part of numerous WikiProjects.
 * 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 is different from how we discussed it in class because it focuses on things like Peabody's genealogy or her career when we focused more on her ideology.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Overall the article seems to be doing well; it is organized and contains a fair amount of information on Peabody.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article is strong in that it has images and a great career section.
 * How can the article be improved? I think the article could be improved by adding a longer personal life section and also expanding on Peabody's contributions to education.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would assess the article as slightly 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:Talk:Elizabeth Peabody