User:B.coco/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: Labor relations
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article because labor relations and how it relates to human resource management is something that interests me.

Lead
The lead begins with a clear and concise sentence that gives a brief preview about what the topic explains. However, afterwards it continues to explain the topic further without giving a description of each main paragraph/topic of the article. The lead provides information that is further described later on in the article, and it is a concise beginning to the article without providing excess unnecessary information.
 * Guiding questions
 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content
The content provided in the article is solely about the topic of labor relations. It is completely relevant and describes labor relations and how it works today. From what I can tell the content is up to date unless any laws have been changed recently that are related to labor relations. To further the explanation the lead could have included more real life examples of when labor relations is used in every day business life and in different occupations. However, there is no specific content missing that describes the essence of what labor relations is. There is no reference to an equity gap related to labor relations or any historically underrepresented populations but it does briefly reference how labor relations connects to social inequality.
 * Guiding questions
 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance
The article is of neutral tone with no bias detected. The article is simply explanatory and informative without giving off any biases towards the topic or any subsets of the topic.
 * Guiding questions
 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References
Specific quotations are backed up by sources however not all facts stated have a source to rely on. The sources that are provided are reliable and perfect for giving further information on the topic of the article. The sources are current, and to note, the laws of labor relations aren't changing often enough for theses sources to no longer be reliable. The two sources provided are only written five years apart so it may be hard to get a historical view on the topic. All references to other topics and articles are working and reliable links as well.
 * Guiding questions
 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization
The article is to the point and informative without providing excess unnecessary information or going off on unrelated topics. It is very easy to read and understand, there are no errors in grammar or spelling that I can tell. Although the article is informatory there is no specific sections going in depth on different subsets of the topic to really explain further, therefore there is no break down of different sections in the topic. There is also no clear ending or conclusion to the article.
 * Guiding questions
 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * 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?

Images and Media
There are no images provided to enhance the readers understanding of the topic.
 * Guiding questions
 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page
There are no conversations going on in the talk page. The article is rated as stub class and mid importance and is a part of the Organized Labor WikiProject.
 * Guiding questions
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions
The article was informative yet lacking in specific areas where the readers knowledge of the topic could have been furthered. The information given was concise and clear and the sources are reliable and up to date. However more subsets of the topic could have been added to go into more detail of the different aspects of labor relations. It is underdeveloped in the sense that not enough information is given to go into more depth on the topic but also well developed in the sense that the reader does get a clear view on labor relations and what it is.
 * Guiding questions
 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or 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: