User:Alyssanoche/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:
 * Weev
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Since our writing class is about written skills within technology, I think this article can relate to the topic as it discusses how what an individual puts out online can result in serious consequences for both them and the receiver.

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?
 * Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise

Lead evaluation
The lead gives a good introduction to Andrew, or "weev", as it tells the audience who he is, what he is a part of, and briefly explains how his actions got him to where he is today.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No; No

Content evaluation
The content of this article provides all of the necessary information that is needed to know more about Andrew's history.

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?
 * There has not been any updates about Andrew, or "weev", since 2017.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of this article is very neutral and does not display any biases.

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?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No; No
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
From the sources that I clicked on, there are not many authors that are of color, however, the articles do provide much information about the topic of the Wikipedia article.

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

Organization evaluation
The organization is excellent and does not make me feel confused or overwhelmed.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There is only one picture and it is of weev.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

Images and media evaluation
There are not enough images to evaluate this section.

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 is citation issue and confusion about whether weev was black white hacker or a white hat hacker.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Low-importance; Yes
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The article provides information about how certain actions online can lead to certain consequences which was not discussed in class.

Talk page evaluation
There is not much talking is going on on the talk page.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall, I think the article does a great job at providing all of the necessary information that is needed to inform the audience about the individual.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Organization is great and does not add too little or too much details.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Include recent updates about the individual.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is complete and well-developed.

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: