User:Alexzandria39/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.


 * Aboriginal child protection: (Aboriginal child protection)
 * I chose this article to better understand the protection of indigenous children when it comes to adoption. Most people think that you can adopt a child from any cultural back ground but under some laws most people do not have the authority to make these decisions.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes
 * 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
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? no
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? there is content missing. should go more in depth for each section.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? yes

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? yes, the section about Australia was underrepresented.
 * 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? no
 * Are the sources current? no, most sources were from 2008
 * 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? no
 * Are images well-captioned? no
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? there aren't any images
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? there aren't any images

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 not many conversations about this topic.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Rated class- C, and is apart of WikiProjects ethic groups and human rights.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This topic differs as it doesn't give the view point from the people who were effected as in class we talk about how this affects certain people and how we can fix it.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Overall the article was knowledge
 * What are the article's strengths? The article was organized well and was straight forward.
 * How can the article be improved? I t could improved on getting more currents sources and more detailed information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is under developed. The article should provide more information oh the policies regarding a child being removed from a parent/ family.

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: