User:Anksen/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Hui Cao

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because the article was about a demographic I feel deserves more attention, and because the article shows obviously that some work needed to be done upon reading.

Evaluate the article
Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

 * The introductory sentence describes the author's current life. However, it would be improved by including the author's dob.
 * The lead includes a description of the article's current career and major achievements, but does not cover research or early life, which are both sections included in the article.
 * The lead does include information about research topics (mesoscopic physics) that are not included in the article.
 * The lead is concise but is missing some information.

Content

 * Each section of the article is related to the content.
 * The content is recent and up to date.
 * DOB and other core information is missing.
 * This content is a biography of a woman POC.

Tone and Balance
Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.


 * The article seems neutral.
 * The claims are neutral, but some of the wording or tone is personal.
 * The article is written and edited by a very low number of authors, who seem to have similar viewpoints.
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * No, there are many pieces of information that are uncited or not backed up by other sources.
 * Many cited sources are based on the author's own work.
 * All the sources are current (2010-2020).
 * Many of the sources are the subject's own work, and the article could be improved with greater source variety.
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * Checked links work.

Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * The wording of the article is often professional, but sometimes includes personal and informal language.
 * No obvious spelling or grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized into sections, and each section is organized by time.

Images and Media

 * The article includes a single image which aids in understanding what the subject looks like.
 * The image is captioned well, but could be more detailed.
 * As the image is said to be the author's own work, I could not tell if the image was unethically sourced.
 * The image is laid out in a logically sensible way.

Talk page discussion
The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * The talk page is empty.
 * The article is C-rated.

Overall impressions

 * The article is rated as a C-class low importance article. The article is a completed article, but reads more like an almost final draft.
 * The article has a good overview of Cao's research.
 * The article can be improved by using more professional language, and by leaving less information uncited. The article also heavily relies on a single interview for most of the information provided on Cao's early life, so can be improved by improving source variety in this section.
 * I would say the article is in a good middle ground, but is in no way a fully completed article. The article would need language editing, as well as more sources to confirm uncited information.

Examples of good feedback
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.