User:Asbank01/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: Brooke Borel
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This is an article that has a lot of issues so it would be good practice and easy to figure out what the issues are.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes but very short
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, needs work
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, needs work
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Too short

Lead evaluation
Minimal information, needs a lot more.

Four references for one sentence seems like a lot.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, missing segments on her personal life and career contributions
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Unsure, needs more references - this is a deficiency
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Her university program, and link to her book

Content evaluation
Too many primary sources

Language can be tightened and seems a little simplistic (not very exact, fact-based)

Links to narratives missing

Musical comedies need more information than just links

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * It is written in a positive light, maybe a little biased, needs more facts
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * "Brooke borel is not only an author, journalist, and editor, but she also teaches writing workshops at the Brooklyn Brainery and New York University." seems one sided
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Not sure about the wording "her most famous work"
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Per above comments - most famous work, praising particular parts without sources

Tone and balance evaluation
Seems biased and language needs to be tighter and have more facts

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Not much, a lot of primary sources and missing links
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Not really, need more
 * Are the sources current?
 * Some are from 2020, others from 2016 and 2017- need more
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Need better sources

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes to all those 3, but needs more facts to back it up
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I saw
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes but more sections needed

Organization evaluation
Seems good but needs more sections

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * It does have an image of the person but not much more, also her image also has other people in it - might need to replace with one just with her
 * Needs more images maybe of her books and movies to make it more engaging
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, maybe could use more information about where she is speaking in the image
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Unsure, how can you tell?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The image is okay but could be better

Images and media evaluation
Need more images, also the one present has other people in it

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Not yet
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Stub-Class, Low-Importance, supported by Science and Academia Work Group
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * BLP, poor sources, within scope, photo requested
 * BLP, poor sources, within scope, photo requested

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Low importance
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Easy to read, has an image, some recent sources
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Missing a lot of information, lead needs work, make it stronger with facts
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped

Overall evaluation
Need a lot of work

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: Talk:Brooke Borel