User:Baudette/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: Snowflake
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Article chosen for class

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * could be simpler and easier to read for the public.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It is missing a description of its use as a symbol
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * On this page, should it include all types of ice crystals? Or should that be left to the ice crystals page?
 * should we relate it to how most rain forms, that most precipitation starts as ice crystals
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * equations for the growth of snowflakes could be added
 * If they have a further reading section, then they should have more than one article
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No history topics are added

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?
 * yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * one or two sources could be updated
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * yes
 * 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?
 * easy to read for a meteorologist but could be simplified for the public
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * not any that i noticed
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * could update the pictures
 * 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?
 * could be larger

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 on the talk page discuss similar flaws that I see. With the addition of artificial snowflakes being important.
 * 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?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is an okay article, and obviously it is an okay enough article that no one has edited it since 2018, but there is plenty of with to be done.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The addition of sections detailing difference types of snow crystals, simplification for the general public, how these crystals create optical phenomenon, etc
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped
 * Underdeveloped

Overall evaluation
WE MUST TEACH THE WORLD THAT SNOW ISNT ONLY IN DENTRITIC SHAPES, THERES A WHOLE LOTTA SHAPES.

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: