User:Assopwill/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: Praxeology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * The article seemed interesting that human behavior is purposeful and not influenced as much by others.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, it gives a good short overview of what praxeology is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, it only mentions the Austrian School -- which is only one section -- and also decides to mention the Polish school -- which does not have a section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, the Polish school is not included in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is pretty concise. I makes the theory digestible.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The content seems relevant to the topic, all content informs the reader. Although I don't know the general trends, the etymology section seems pretty long.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Since this is an older theory, this page seems up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The theory seems to be missing the Polish school of thought.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the philosophy is objectively described and the article provides relevant criticisms.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes, but they appear under the criticisms section and are cited
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The criticisms viewpoint may be underrepresented, it would be good to cite more debates about the topic.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Not really. This is simply a theory presenting its beliefs and there is a criticism section the reader can look at.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Mostly, 4 citations are needed for facts and claims.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Since this is an older theory, I am unaware with the wealth of more-contemporary literature on the topic. I think adding more recent studies, if possible, would help the sources and inform the reader.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Not really. There may be a literature gap in recent times, as the most recent sources seem to be around the turn of the 21st Century.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Most links work, but there are also print and database sources which users may not be able to directly access.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Mostly. The most confusing part is the etymology section, as it deals with the word's development through language. This takes up a large chunk of the article.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Few, if any, in the article.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, but more may info may be needed to add to the Austrian and Polish schools.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * This page is pretty quiet. There hasn't been anything since May of 2019, when a user pointed out discrepancies for the influencers chosen in the French and English articles. This was a matter of content and it seems to have been ignored or unseen by other editors.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as "start class" and "mid importance." The article is part of projects on philosophy, economics, liberalism and sociology.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * On the talk page, it is surprising how many user comments seem to go unanswered. When comments are answered, however, responses go above and beyond to provide citations and substantial reasoning behind decisions. For the article itself, a lot of the information relies on philosopher theories and not actual research. Building a contemporary research study would certainly help the topic's validity, but that may prove difficult and costly. This may be a scenario where a topic lacks enough promient research for rigorous source backing.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is rated as a "start," meaning more information is needed. The basic framework is set, but users need to add more information and make editorial changes as necessary.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Provides a good history of the word and theory's development across culture and through language.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Adding the Polish school section -- which is introduced but never explained -- and adding more recent literature on the topic.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is complete, but provides the bare minimum. More works and information on the theory itself should be presented and more criticisms should be featured to remain objective. Overall, this article has the main sections in-line, but there needs to be more emphasis on the theory itself.

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: