User:Betheyr/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: Joan Feynman
 * I wanted to edit this article because it is about an American female astrophysicist. I feel like her article is relatively short compared to many of her men scientific counterparts.

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? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise.

Lead evaluation
The lead was good.

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? No.

Content evaluation
The content was well balanced, but slightly lacking in the personal life sections. That is understandable, however, because it is not a particularly important section compared to the sections about her research. The most recent information comes from 2009, so I would like to see if there are more relevant sources.

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.

Tone and balance evaluation
I feel like the tone neutral and unbiased. There are no opinions stated on whether her work is "good" or not, it just gives the facts.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes and no.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes,
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Sources and references evaluation
Most of the information in this article comes from a source written by Joan's son. The source definitely has a bias because it is just an article praising his mother, so I am unsure if it is truly a reliable source. It is noted multiple times that the source is written about his mother, but it is used multiple times.

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? Some minor grammar errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes.

Organization evaluation
There are some small grammar errors, but none that impede the information in the article.

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

Images and media evaluation
There are only two images, but they are either public domain or cited. They help further the understanding of the article.

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 are not any it seems.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is connected to the Women in Science WikiProject.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We have not talked about this specific scientist in class.

Talk page evaluation
There was a helpful note in the talk page that I fixed, but I am not quite sure if I have the authority to do so. I deleted the table of links page for Richard Feynman that was on her page because she is not him and someone on the talk page asked for it to be done. She now needs her own template because she dose not yet have one.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I would say it is mediocre. There are good elements to it, but it is based on a biased source and had information about other people on it when it was meant to be about her.
 * What are the article's strengths? Well laid out.
 * How can the article be improved? More information from different sources not just "My mother the scientist". There are multiple sources used, but mainly only cited once for one or two things, but source number two is cited 10 times and for main information in the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is well-developed I just think it needs some minor changes.

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: Feedback/ Question