User:Bdarken/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)
 * ~ History of glass
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * ~I chose to evaluate this article because it seemed like an interesting topic that is related to science and contains information about Chinese science, and I feel comfortable editing the page since it is not too important of a page.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * ~Yes, the article gives an opening sentence that is appropriate for the article.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * ~Yes, the lead includes a brief description of the major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * ~No, all the information in the Lead appears in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * ~The Lead is not overly detailed, it is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * ~Yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * ~Yes, everything is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * ~There is no missing content or content that doesn't belong.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * ~Yes, the article is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * ~No, many claims are given and are presented neutral to one another.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * ~No, the viewpoints mentioned show all different views into the history.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * ~There was no persuasion involved in this article.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * ~No, there is some missing information, the article has reliable secondary sources for most of the information but has some areas that need citing.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * ~Sources do reflect the topic of the article.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, the sources are from the past few decades.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * ~Yes, the links provided work as links to other websites.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * ~Yes, the article is organized well by the categories and can be understood easily.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * ~No, the article is free of spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * ~Yes, the article is able to separate out the sections for each major point.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * ~Yes, the images provide detail into the topic for a better understanding.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * ~The images are well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * ~The images used all adhere to the copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * ~Yes, all images are laid out in a way that is visually pleasing.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * ~They are distinguishing between glass and other types of man-made objects. They also are critiquing people's writing.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as "Star-Class".
 * ~Yes, it is part of WikiProjects. It isn't rated as "Star-Class"
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * ~ The way Wikipedia discusses this topic is to find any work that has been misplaced or debated and mention it on the talk thread. It differs because it includes more detail into the topics.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * ~The article is well-established with lots of information and is written well.
 * What are the article's strengths? The documentation of the sources is well done.
 * ~The history gives a lot of detail into the different aspects of glass history.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * ~This article should fill in the sources that did not make it into 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, it is not a stub, and it does not lack contributors.

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: