User:Avaaakatz/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Water scarcity in Africa

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it is up the alley of one of my greatest passions and aspirations. I hope to educate people and have a direct, hands-on impact in foreign countries that are struggling in various aspects of development. One sustainable and development goal relevant to this class, is the topic of water scarcity and availability. The top destination of places to visit for me is a country in Subsaharan Africa. This article is important because it addresses the lack of adequate access to a resource that is essential for all life and is a basic human right.

Evaluate the article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Kind of? It could be better.

Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

yes.

Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)

No.

Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Concise.

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

yes.

Is the content up-to-date?

Some new, some a couple years old.

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

I don't think so.

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

yes.

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Is the article from a neutral point of view?

As neutral as you can get on a subject of such importance and lack of resources.

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

They are more so facts.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

I think the viewpoints expressed need the representation

Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?

I think so

Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

No, it does naturally though.

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

Yes.

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

yes.

Are the sources current?

most of them.

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

yes.

Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

Yes. Books and lots of research articles.

Check a few links. Do they work?

yes.

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

yes.

Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

no.

Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

yes.

Images and Media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

Some are good, some are bad.

Are images well-captioned?

Some are good, some are bad.

Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

yes.

Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Kind of.

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

important ones! I think this article does a good job of representing facts, but there are better ways to present this information.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

Yes. Part of way bigger topics.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

We have not specifically talked about Africa in class.

Overall impressions

What is the article's overall status?

Strong and good way to get some information... definitely should look at other sources on the topic.

What are the article's strengths?

Clearly organized with lots of facts.

How can the article be improved?

I think a creative approach on the representation of content would improve it, however, Wikipedia is not necessarily the correct platform for that.

How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Well developed.