User:Anuta1920/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: Covid-19 Pandemic
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

There is a lot of information out there about the pandemic (some accurate, some inaccurate). I am interested to see how the authors of this wiki page organized all the information and what sources they cited.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead starts out with a very brief history of the origins of the virus. Then it moves into basic hygiene measures to avoid contracting it. It ends with a summary of how the virus has affected our world as a whole. Since this is such a long wikipedia page, it doesn't preview everything, but it does discuss some of the major sections that are covered later on the page.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content is extremely up-to-date given the ever changing situation with the pandemic. I like how the article had an entire section devoted to "misinformation" and "increased xenophobia." These are two very important facets of the pandemic that are not often discussed.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article for the most part is neutral! It doesn't seem biased. The majority of the article is presenting hard facts to the readers. In general, you could say that it is slightly left leaning, but that is only because the United States managed to make basic safety measures (like wearing a mask) political. It does a good job of presenting a holistic overview, even breaking down the country-by-country effects.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The sources are current, but they are a mix of factual/sensationalist sources. There are a lot of news articles cited from Al Jazeera, Business Insider, etc. in addition to a couple of scientific reports. Also, I checked a couple of the links and they are working!


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article was really well-organized given the fact that this pandemic is a fairly new topic relative to other topics on wikipedia. I think the authors did a great job organizing it for a worldwide audience. There were very few grammar errors.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

Yes, there were a lot of images featured. They were mainly graphs showing the effects of the corona virus on different parts of the world. All the captions are short and to the point. They layout is definitely visually appealing. It doesn't distract from the writing.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There is a lot of users on the Talk page clarifying sources and making sure the information is correct. This makes sense, especially with this topic. Misinformation is rampant. Secondly, a lot of users were focused on making sure that technical terms were defined clearly which definitely makes it easier for readers to understand the article even if they don't have a medical background.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall, the article is very strong. The strengths include the organization of the page and the ability of the authors to condense and sift through all the information being reported about covid-19. Even though I hear about the corona virus on the news everyday, I felt that I learned a lot of new things reading through the wikipedia page. Also, I like how the wikipedia didn't have a US focus. It was interesting to hear about how other countries are being impacted/handling the pandemic.


 * 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?

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: