User:Bheff202/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) Habitat
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I am interested in sustainability and the environment and found this page related to those topics.

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 lead has a concise introductory sentence. The lead is detailed but also concise because it lists different topics and types of habitats, which is what the page is about. The lead has some sentences that are worded a little strange so it may be confusing to get to the point but overall, the lead is clear and concise. ====

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 on the habitat page was relevant to the topic. The content was informative and covered a vast amount of topics which ranged from types of habitats, to how we can protect them or how they relate to conservation. ====

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 neutral throughout the different subheadings of the page. The article represents each topic well and does not seem to persuade the reader in any direction. ====

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- There were many sources provided in the article. The sources were up to date for the most part and I did check multiple links and each link worked and brought you to some more interesting articles. ====

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 in depth information. There were a few sentences that were structured a little backwards that I had to re-read a few time to make sure I knew what the article wanted to say. Overall, the information was described easily and I was able to gather great information from it. ====

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- Each section or subheading had a picture in it- there were only two small sections that did not. Some sections had up to three pictures that followed along with the topic of the section. The pictures were labeled properly and were interesting and colorful. The pictures were visually appealing and made the topics more intriguing and relatable. ====

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- There were some changes and clarifications made to the article from other reviewers on the talk page. There were some links from reviewers provided to the person who wrote the article that could provide definitions to some of the describing words in the article. ====

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: The article is interesting and covers multiple topics. The pictures stand out and draw you into the topic. There seem to be some reviews that said some information should be clarified or changed around. There was some wording that could be improved and could get to the point more clearly. I found the article interesting overall. The article provided various subheadings, which I believe is a strength. ====

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: