User:Bakerme2/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: Garnet
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I am interested in the mineral garnet.

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?
 * Yes, historical use of garnet is not discussed in the article outside of the lead.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * 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?
 * There is no mention of garnet being used in U-Pb studies.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, there is no real division in regards to the subject though.
 * 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?
 * No, the "geological Importance" section does not cite any sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No, not at all.
 * Are the sources current?
 * In other sections they are.
 * 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?
 * Not that I noticed
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, though I feel like the geology section should be above the section about synthetic garnets.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * Where and how to report synthetic garnets
 * Crystal chemical composition convention
 * The use of "ruby-red"
 * The removal of "citations" that directed the reader to commercial gem pages
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * B-class, part of 5 different wikiprojects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * More focus on gemstones, synthetic varieties, and historical use than metamorphic petrology.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Needs work
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * List of every known endmember
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Citations added to geology section
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is okay in most areas but the geology section needs work

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: