User:Armaananand26/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: Kashmir Conflict (Kashmir conflict)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate
 * I chose to evaluate this article due to the structural fallacies in the decision making process and the aftermath of the order, which saw conflict within the state.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation

 * Yes, the Lead includes an introductory sentence and it addresses and describes the topic.
 * Yes, it does include a brief description of the article's sections. However, it fails to address all of them
 * No, it does not
 * While the lead doesn't expand on any particular topic, it still leans towards being overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation

 * Yes, however, it doesn't expand on certain key themes such as pre-partition Kashmir.
 * Yes, the content us up to date as the most recent edit is on the 30th of September, 2019.
 * While there isn't any content that seems to be missing, I feel the section 'Nehru's Promise' could be incorporated into the section on 'Article 370'.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation

 * Yes, it is relatively neutral
 * No claim seems heavily biased, however, the section on article 370 isn't neutral.
 * I feel the sections concerning US positions on the conflict, as well as the section concerning plebiscite are a bit underrepresented and could be structured better.
 * No, it doesn't attempt to push forth a position or dissuade the reader from one either.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

 * No, all facts aren't backed up by a secondary source.
 * For the most, they seem thorough.
 * Yes, the sources have been updated regularly
 * Yes, the links are functional

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation

 * I feel that the article is a little verbose in certain sections and a bit too concise in others.
 * Yes, it does have a few grammatical errors.
 * I feel it could be organized better by incorporating certain topics into larger themes as opposed to keeping them separate. This in reference to the section on plebiscite.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation

 * I feel that it could be better, especially while using the image to explain Pakistans view. A picture of Kashmir's map from Pakistan's perspective help the reader understand the conflict better.
 * Yes, they are.
 * Yes, they do.
 * No, I feel they could have been laid out better.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation

 * The conversation regarding China's involvement is particularly interesting
 * It has been listed as a level 5 article in history and is of interest to three wikiprojects.
 * It provides a detailed overview of the many conflicts that have taken place in Kashmir, post independence. In class, we discussed the Kashmir conflict very briefly, with the idea of getting back to it later in the semester.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation

 * The article expands on the broader topics well by providing information for all general themes discussed, however, it doesn't incorporate information into the sections they should be in, particularly the section on plebiscite. It can be improved by correcting the minor grammatical errors, restructuring the sections and updating and adding to the pictures. Overall, it is a well developed article which needs minor edits.

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: