User:Arinmarie/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: Rice Production in the United States
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. - I have chosen this article because my love for rice is a bit extreme.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * It kind of does and doesn't. It gets the point across but it doesn't cover a lot of the information in the article.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Not really. A lot of the main history aspects are left out of the lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No. It is pretty straight forward with its information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It's very concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it's all about rice.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * All of the information used in the article was written within the last couple of decades. But the article could use a lot more updated information.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The only content missing would have to be recent events happening within the rice agriculture.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes. There is no bias present in the article.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No. All the information is factual and non bias.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No. All information is concise with just evidence used as the base.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No. No biased wording is used.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, all information seems to be accounted for.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * A lot of the article is just history, so all sources and information check out.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Unfortunately, the sources are not really current. Most of them are from the early 2000's.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * I clicked on about four of them, and none of them worked for me.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * I clicked on about four of them, and none of them worked for me.
 * I clicked on about four of them, and none of them worked for me.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * In my opinion, it is pretty well written. But it does lack in some areas.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I couldn't find any mistakes regarding grammar.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It breaks it down into helpful sections so I think it's done really well.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It breaks it down into helpful sections so I think it's done really well.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes. It shows pictures that relate to the specific part of the article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, the picture captions also include sources.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, they are sourced.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The pictures are kind of small and put off on the side of the articles, but other than that, it is good looking.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The pictures are kind of small and put off on the side of the articles, but other than that, it is good looking.
 * The pictures are kind of small and put off on the side of the articles, but other than that, it is good looking.

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 currently no conversations that I could find going on about my topic.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * My article is a part of WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We don't talk about the history of rice. But we've talked about it's place in Arkansas economy.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It's informative but it has some gaps.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It has a lot on it's history.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Nothing is really updated on it. It's all old information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is well developed, just lacking.

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: