User:B.Penner4/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: Timeline of women's suffrage in California
 * I've chosen to evaluate this article because women's suffrage was a huge part of feminist history

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * 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? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is very short and concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? The content was that last edited on September 28. 2020 but in terms of content, the 'history' only covers up to 1916.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is a lot of content missing because the article only covers up to 1916 and does not fully or holistically encompass women's suffrage in the US or in California
 * 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

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


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

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? A few
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? None
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is of importance to Women history, elections and referendums, Human right, and California. And ranges from Mid-importance and Low-importance
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Although we never specifically looked at California's women's suffrage we did look at some different historical figures that played important roles in women's suffrage and liberation around the world. This article differs from what we learned in class in that it based more in political history rather than feminist thought

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It well written but could use more work
 * What are the article's strengths? It covers the early history of women's suffrage in California very well.
 * How can the article be improved? This article could be improved by adding some sections that cover more recent dates
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is well written but underdeveloped

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: