User:Bgene2/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: Chemistry
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Since I am studying to become a chemistry teacher, I thought it would be good to look at the "Chemistry" Wikipedia page as I do not think I have ever done so.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it does. It hits a lot of the main points of chemistry.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes it does. I personally think that it could do without describing the four types of bonds and save that for the major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The lead talks about all of the things that chemistry can be used for, but doesn't describe those uses in the article. I am sure there are other articles that do describe those particular uses because if the "Chemistry" article included every possible think it would be used for, then the page would be extremely large. So I think it is probably for the best that they didn't include those details, and instead just gave some main/broad examples of its use.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is very concise for the most part. Like I stated earlier, it would be best if they excluded the four types of bonds and saved that for a later section.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes it is
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes it is
 * Is there content that is missing?
 * I do not think there is anything in particular missing. Chemistry covers a wide range of information, and I can tell that they have done an excellent job at proving links to other Wikipedia pages that would describe the vocabulary and topics in better detail. I did notice that the redox and equilibrium sections are quite short, but upon looking further I realized that there was a main article linked to the short paragraph.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Overall, I do not think so. I think that it could incorporate links for famous chemists. I read in the article that it talks about some of the major contributors of the field, but there could be links to other contributors that represents more females as well as ethnic and culturally diverse scientist.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes it is.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I do not think so.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I do not think so. As I look through all of the topics, they are all equally discussed.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * It is very neutral with no persuasion,

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?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * There are some sources from quite a few years ago, but much of the principle is still the same, so I am not sure if there is a need to update them.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * It does not appear very diverse on the sources that I evaluated. Mostly white males.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All of the links that I checked worked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * As a chemistry major, I understand all of the chemistry concepts, but I also think it would be rather easy to read as an intro level chemistry student.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * None that I could see.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes the sections are appropriate an clearly designed.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes they do, and some GIFs as well.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes they are.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * There is nothing that stands out to me.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

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 discussions mostly on wording changing within the article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a B- article and is part of WikiProject Chemistry and Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital / Core
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I think that it goes really in depth with the history of chemistry.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is a level-2 Vital Article
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * I think the strengths are that it provides an broad spectrum of each of the main topics with a lot of links to corresponding topics that can dive deeper into the point of interest.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think that it would be interesting to list some careers in chemistry within the article. I feel that a lot of times students to not realize how prevalent chemistry is in our lives and how so many people work in it everyday (and may not even know it).
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I think that it is well-developed.

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: