User:BPMcLaughlin/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: Paleoecology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it provides a broad, concise overview of the discipline.

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, it seems to.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, not that I noticed.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Yes, it is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think there's anything in particular that is missing. I do think a few more details, examples, and applications could be peppered throughout the article.

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?
 * It seems that some sentences could be supported by a reference. They don't necessarily cite facts but definitions that seemingly could be tied to reference material?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The field of paleoecology is quite old and well-established so I think there would be additional information available on the topic that was not included here. The page does not list that many references.
 * Are the sources current?
 * A few are relatively current and a few are not.
 * 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?
 * It seems to be.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * It only has one image; additional images would have been helpful.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, but it could be good to include a line about how the fossil relates to paleoecology as a discipline.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * I suppose so.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The main focus of the talk page seems to be concerns about the article lacking detail and comprehensiveness about additional aspects of the field (which I agree with).
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * I do not know where to find the rating. Yes, this is part of WIkiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I think the way Wikipedia discusses the topic is as a very broad-strokes overview. In class, we discuss a lot of the nuance and detail behind the history and methods of the discipline, and we discuss the different ways paleoecology can be specifically applied to a variety of questions and topics. I think that the Wikipedia article lacks some key detail.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I don't know where to find this information.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It provides a concise overview.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The addition of specific details and examples would strengthen the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * 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: