User:Bchestn1/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: (link) O. J. Simpson murder case
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. The article has to do with media coverage (tied to class) and is also of personal interest.

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, there are references to racial concerns that I did not see elsewhere.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Overly detailed

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? The content in the article is relating to the topic, but some is leaning more towards conspiracy than the actual trial itself.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The information seems wot be up to date at least through when anything changed in 2016 (when the Bronco was displayed in the museum).
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Some of the content is conspiracy about the case that is not actually proven factual and could be removed.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The article appears to be neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Within some sections there are hints at bias against OJ Simpson, but in other paragraphs there seems to be bias for OJ Simpson.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The conspiracy viewpoints are a bit too much for topics that cannot be confirmed.
 * 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? A lot of the information comes from news articles rather than academic articles.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? There is a thorough amount of sources, but I am sure sure there are more reliable sources to be found.
 * Are the sources current? Yes and no. The sources used vary in times, some being closer to when the trial was actually going o, and some being from closer to the present.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, the links I checked worked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The information is a bit heavy and without a clear way of organization. It is generally in order, but it could be improved upon.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I saw a couple minor grammatical errors, but did not see any spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It is broken down into sections to reflect major points, but I think the order of the sections could be improved upon.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are very few images used to enhance the article
 * Are images well-captioned? Some captions are better than others. There is definitely room for improvement.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? To my knowledge, yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Not at all. The first few used are placed better, but the further one gets into the article the image placement deteriorates.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There is good conversation on the talk page about how to make useful additions, and there is lots about properly adhering to wikipedia guidelines while doing so.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated by some as B and C-class, high importance. It is also tied to multiple WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There is more in-depth insight to the issues that wikipedians face on articles everyday.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It's a decent article in my eyes.
 * What are the article's strengths? There is lots of information present to be worked upon.
 * How can the article be improved? The format/organization could greatly improve the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that it is developed to an extent, as all of the necessary information is there; it just needs to be put into a more readable format for better comprehension.

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: Talk:O. J. Simpson murder case