User:BadKattitude/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: Urban agriculture
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate:
 * I chose this article from the Urban Studies and planning Wikiproject because I feel it relates to the evolution of landscape architecture from ornamental to functional. Furthermore, the Wikiproject group gave an article a B which means that the article has room for improvement so I figured that would give me some room to analyze and offer suggestion for improvement.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The Introductory sentence is concise but contains awkward wording that may confuse those who aren't familiar with the topic
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * the lead gives some overview of the article's major sections but leaves out a lot, such as the impact, global implementations, and consequences of urban agriculture
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, it contains only information within the article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * the lead is concise to the point that it is not detailed enough.

Lead evaluation
The lead is to brief and doesn't adequately reflect all the subtopics covered in the article. Further, the sentence structure is awkward

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes, all content is related to urban agriculture
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, a lot of the content refers to modern day practices and relevancy
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * one of the sections has the advertising that it needs further citations but this is a small section. Other than that there is plenty of citation and no information that isn't relevant

Content evaluation
The article has a wide variety of content, all of which are up to date and relevant to the topic although some need more in-depth information as they are short and contain surface level info.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article states facts and doesn't try to convince the reader
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I do believe the positive view points are overrepresented without negatives being listed until the end of the article
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone and balance of the article are professional, neutral, and factual. They do not sway the reader in any direction.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, there are lots of reliable citations
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are primarily research papers that cover a wide range of topics and appear to unbiased
 * Are the sources current?
 * some of the sources are a bit old with older publications dating back to 1993. That information could be updated by now, but a majority of the publication date from the 2000s and 2010s making it acceptable.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, I clicked 3 links and they all works

Sources and references evaluation
There is a wide variety of sources, a majority of which are academic articles. There appears to be no broken articles or unrelated content

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * the article is easy to read but the information needs to be more concise at times it felt like certain sections could be combined or more information was needed.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There were no grammatical or spelling errors
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is broken down into logical section but needs some re-organized, as mentioned some sections felt repetitive and needed to be combined or grouped together.

Organization evaluation
The article is weirdly organized and needs a new structure in order to group relevant information closer to teacher.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The photos are images relating to the topic but there are little to no diagrams describing the topics the article covers
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes, the captions do not leave the reader confused
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

Images and media evaluation
The images displayed are of a high quality and are not confusing. There however are too few photos for all the topics covered in the article and few contain diagrams explaining the scientific processes discussed in the article

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 conversations are primarily about removing and updating links, there are some conversations about wanting to expand the article to include more information that the person finds relevant
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The Article is rated as a B on the Urban Studies and planning/assessment Wikiproject
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't discussed urban agriculture in class

Talk page evaluation
Those who post in the talk page are clearly well informed about the topic and have a high standard for maintaining and improving it

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's status is almost complete and is reliable source of information
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article contains a lot of reliable sources and cites them prolifically. Further, the article covers a large range of information that is relevant to understanding the topic
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More photos should be added in order to better illustrate the ideas of the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is well developed and needs minor editing in order to reach a higher status but will need more information added and grammatical revisions to reach top status.

Overall evaluation
The article is incredibly informative and is a great intro to anyone who wants to learn about urban agriculture. However, some of the information feels weirdly organized and at times was only surface level.

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: