User:Bellaespinoza2021/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Teacher education)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose it because this one is the only one that really stuck out to my. I thought it would be really interesting to read about.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes it does include a introductory sentence

Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? yes it include multiple sections on the page.

Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)    No

Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed? I would consider it concise for the paper. It is to the point.

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes most of the subtopics are relevant to education.

Is the content up-to-date? yes

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is somthings missing but not major.

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance. Although it does fail to bring up history.

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Is the article from a neutral point of view? yes there can't really be 2 sides of education training.

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?No

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Overpresented.

Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it is pretty neutral.

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? For the ones that I checked yes it was backed up by reliable sources.

Are the sources current? yes

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? yes there are multiple authors.

Check a few links. Do they work? yes.

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes it is easy to read.

Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? For what I saw no

Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes there are multiple sections

Images and Media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes it describes education training very well.

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? there was one image.

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? there were no conversation yet.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes it is apart of Wikiprojects.

Overall impressions

What is the article's overall status? I think it got to the point but could use some revising.

What are the article's strengths? was pretty detailed

How can the article be improved? Make the paper not as long.

How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?