User:BWhetten/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: Phase retrieval
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Because I am currently working with phase retrieval algorithms and thus have experience in this field.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * The lead is clear and concise. However, the first sentence does refer to the phase problem without defining it, which makes it unclear. Also, almost all of the info in the lead is not described more in depth later in the article and is instead uniquely in the lead.


 * 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

 * Guiding questions
 * All the content in the article is relevant and belongs. The most recent citation is from almost 15 years ago, so maybe some more up to date info could be included.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions
 * The subject isn't controversial and the article presents everything factually and unbiased.


 * 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

 * Guiding questions
 * There are plenty of sources in all the right places. Again, there are no recent sources. It seems like none of the links to PDFs work, but the links to internet articles do work.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * The article is clear and concise, and I don't see any spelling errors. It could use some more sections beyond just "Methods." Adding sections on applications or uniqueness of the solutions would be useful.


 * 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

 * Guiding questions
 * It only has one picture, so maybe another one with an example of an image after use of the algorithm would be good. The image that's already there is very useful and obeys copyright. However, the labeling within the diagram is sometimes unclear.


 * 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

 * Guiding questions
 * There is nothing on the talk page besides a list of 3 wikiprojects that it is a part of: Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics. It is a C-Class article.


 * 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

 * Guiding questions
 * Overall, the article does an excellent job of conveying the basics of Phase Retrieval. Its strength is its simplicity and elegance. It could be improved by further discussion of applications and drawbacks of the algorithm. Overall, I'd say the article has all the essential information but lacks the secondary information needed to make it a fully complete article.


 * 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: