User:Arnoldo FC/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: (link) Bobo doll experiment
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose it because the last talk entry was in 2012 and that is a while!

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The introductory sentence is too long and could be formatted better.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? It seems like it doesn't describe the major sections and it is more of an abstract.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Despite the fact that the lead includes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The wording is straightforward but not concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? It is relevant, but it could probably include more recent research, since it hasn't been edited in a while.
 * Is the content up-to-date? It looks like everything is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There might be some sections such as the Further Reading one that can be removed.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? There are some sections that are in first person.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? It seems like all is pretty neutral, except for those parts where it talks in first person, in which case needs to be changed to a neutral tone.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The viewpoints are based on general consensus.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? It does present the information in such a way to favor the social learning theory, but I can't tell if it is correct.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? All the sources seem to be linked to research articles published in academic journals.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? They could reflect more related research that is more current. It also could have more sourcing to Bandura's books.
 * Are the sources current? They can be outdated.
 * 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? It is not too easy to read, so I think it is not too well-written.
 * 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? It is well-organized.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? It only includes two images at the beginning of the article but could include more
 * Are images well-captioned? Very simply.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? They do.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? They are, but it can have more images.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? They only have been talking about including links to a Youtube video, but nothing too relevant.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is part of the WikiProject Psychology.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It is seen from the research standpoint and does not discuss very many of the cognitive implications.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It has multiple issues.
 * What are the article's strengths? It is well organized in relevant sections.
 * How can the article be improved? It has sections that need to be either elaborated or better written.
 * 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.

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: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bobo_doll_experiment&action=edit