User:AlexsHRMT/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.


 * Alphonso Davies: Alphonso Davies
 * I've chosen to evaluate this article because I used to play soccer with Alphonso and I'm curious to know more about him now and how he's doing as a professional soccer player. Recently I've heard lots of good things and its interesting to think about where his future will take him.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead includes a good introductory sentence describing who the athlete is, his position, what team he plays for, and where he is from. The introductory paragraph outlines the major topics that will be covered throughout the article. The lead does not contain any information that is not present in the article. The lead effectively tells the readers what will be covered without giving them to much information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


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

Content evaluation
The articles content is all related to the athlete and his process of getting to where he is as well as his accomplishments. The content appears to be up to date as it includes accomplishments from his most recent 2019/2020 season. There doesn't seem to be any missing content or content that is out of place. This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, and it does not address any topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is posted in a neutral perspective. It does talk about a lot of the pro's of the athlete, but many athletes have several accomplishments which is got them to where they are today. No claims seem to be heavily biased or supporting a particular position in particular. Some of his accomplishments may be overrepresented, but this is what many individuals wish to know about the athlete. The article doesn't necessarily try to persuade the reader in favor of one position, however, it would be difficult to have negative feelings for the athlete after reading.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The facts in the article are thoroughly backed up by secondary sources, many of these being reliable sources. Yes the sources reflect the available literature in the topic as the articles sources include many sports communities who are very familiar with the athletes situation. The sources are all current ranging from 2016-2020. There are over 90 sources provided in this articles coming from a wide variety of authors and organizations. The links in the article are well updated and provide the information they're supposed to.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article 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?

Organization evaluation
The article is written very well, its easy to read and gets to the point without giving to much useless information. After reading the article, no spelling errors or grammatical errors were found. The article was well-organized with a good introduction and many different headlines categorizing what was being discussed in each section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
The article does include 2 images that show us who the athlete is, however, they are only more recent pictures. Both photos are well captioned telling us which team the athlete is playing for as well as where and when. The images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations, they show us their original source and are referenced correctly. The images are laid out in a visually appealing way, they look like professionally taken photos. More media would improve this article.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
There was lots of conversation going on in the talk page. One conversation was a little edit war/conversation going on in the talk page about the use of "FC," meaning football club when talking about the Vancouver Whitecaps soccer team. The article is rated start-class and is part of a WikiProject. Wikipedia does a good job at ensuring the writing is in neutral tone and excludes biases.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
The article is well done overall. Its strengths include being well-organized, being clear and concise, and it tells readers the information they want to know. The article can be improved by including more about the athletes past and prior teams, as well as adding more pictures from these times. The article is fairly close to complete, it is missing some details, mostly in the athletes past before the fame. The article is well-developed, could just use some more information.

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: