User:Amm567/Evaluate an Article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Abortion and mental health (Abortion and mental health)
 * It is a topic that is relevant to a lot of possible topics my group chose.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead sentence clearly favors one position over the other instead of remaining neutral.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The outline of the major sections included in the article should be more explicit.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * It only has one citation from 2018 and the majority are from 2008. The citations and content could definitely be more up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I think there is content missing from the other side of the argument that the article clearly does not support.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * No
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes -the central claim
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Yes that abortions do not contribute to any mental health issues.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Yes

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?
 * The ones included are thorough, but pretty one sided. There is also a lot of content relevant to this topic that is not discussed or presented.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of them are from 2008 so definitely could be more current.
 * 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 but I think there should be more sections. Definitely is not thorough on all the content that this topic should cover.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * n/a
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * n/a
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * n/a

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 a lot of contentious conversations going on in the talk page. Many are about reverted edits.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Yes, its a part of these WikiProjects:


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It is providing only one side to the argument and relying only on historical facts.

Talk page evaluation
Many comments and disagreement. Article is clearly unbalances and requires a lot of work.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? C
 * What are the article's strengths? It provides some good information and evidence for one side of the argument.
 * How can the article be improved? By providing more evidence for the other side of the argument.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is poorly developed and is missing some crucial information and points of view.

Overall evaluation
The article needs to present information from both sides of the argument. I think there are many crucial topics that need to be included as sub headers which are not currently presented.