User:Bgordime/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: Digital rhetoric
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen to evaluate this article because it covers material that is relevant for our class.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The basic terminology is defined. The author breaks down the terms "digital" and "rhetoric" and defines their individual definitions. This was a good introduction for the following article but the words were very technical at some points and this may overwhelm some readers.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The content in this article is relevant and fitting. Most of the information is also up to date, therefor I would say that the article isn't missing anything that I could notice off the top of my head.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is well balanced and doesn't seem to present a bias in any way, shape, or form. Most of the information in the "concepts" section are given equal consideration and none of the topics seems to be blown out of proportion from the others.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Many of the links contain valid up-to-date information (with the exception of several articles from the 1990's) and are credible sources, I could not find a broken link.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is well written and has a nice clean breakdown of many different concepts of digital rhetoric. I found a couple grammatical errors, but no spelling errors. As aforementioned, the organization is well done.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There is only one photo on this page, it doesn't exactly help explain the topic further and I am not sure if there is copyright infringement or not.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page shows a lot of constructive criticism, everything from minor suggestions to suggestions of removal for entire sections. Many of the people posting are polite and do not tear down the person they are questioning. I found the talk page to be helpful and constructive.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
I wasn't able to find anything relating to "status" or "strength" but believe that this is a well written article. I think improvement could be focused around importing pictures of higher relevance, or a picture that helps further the understanding of the topic. There are some grammatical errors, but nothing that detracts from the value of the written sections. I think this article is pretty much complete, of course there may be something pertaining to digital rhetoric that I do not know is missing.

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: