User:Bherriott/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: Memory sport
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * In addition to having a notably empty Talk section and relatively few contributors, I have found memory sports fascinating ever since I saw a TED talk given by journalist Joshua Foer about his experience in the US Memory Championship and how he 'accidentally' won it using a method known as "the memory palace."

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 includes an introductory sentence that describes what memory sports are. While it then goes on to successfully describe the contents of the article, the remainder of the lead could have been made much more concise as it discusses details not pertinent to an introduction, like the controversy that caused the formation of the sport's governing body. Aside from this, I would suggest rethinking the order by which the information is presented in the lead as important elements such as techniques are banished to the bottom of the page.

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
While being potentially a little too brief, the content does successfully cover all of the major elements surrounding the sport such as disciplines, techniques, records, famous competitors and more. The content is largely up to date having last been updated in October last year. My only suggestion for the content aside from adding more detail to it would be to reorder it to more appropriately represent the importance of each sub-heading. For example, techniques is arguably the most important and unanimously interesting section and yet is not found until several pages into the article.

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 entirely neutral. There is no real analyses taking place, rather the article just presents facts and important events that relate to the sport. The only indication of a bias comes from the Techniques section where the author only delves into detail regarding one memorization technique while naming several more.

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
Given the information that the article presents, the sources cited are appropriate, reliable and relatively current. The author leans heavily on information presented in the sport's governing body's websites, however given much of the article relates to the creation of the sport and how these organizations and competitions began, this is likely the best source to go to. The article does not discuss the sport from a psychological perspective much which is reflected in the sourcing. However, in order to address this important element I will add more academic journals that have discussed the topic.

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 writing is concise, easy to read, and unbiased. However, the organization of sub-headings is slightly off. In order to fix this techniques and disciplines should be given a higher page location.

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 no multi-media.

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 is only one comment in the Talk section that requests an expert to weigh in on the page. The page would definitely benefit from an expert analyses, but there are many other places it could be improved from too.

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
This article is slightly underdeveloped. It presents all of the key facets of memory sports, but fails to delve deep enough into the details or present some of the facts that make the practice so interesting. The main strength of the article is its consistent objectivity.

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: