User:Big Sarah/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: WikiProject Graphic design, List of desktop publishing software
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: Since this project os for an art class, I wanted to choose an art topic and I happen to be a graphic designer, so naturally graphic design really draws my attention.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes. The description is brief, but describes well what the article is about.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, very briefly.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It might be a little too concise. It could do a better job of describing what publishing software does or which ones different people might want to choose.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes. It is nothing more than a thorough list with some brief descriptions just as the introduction says.
 * Is the content up-to-date? It appears to be. None of the information immediately stands out as being very old and the last edit was made yesterday.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There are no references and no description of the "proprietary" section.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, it only lists software that exists, who owns them, and whether or not they're still available.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Most of the "representation" is in the linked sources, and they appear to be pretty fact-based as opposed to opinion based.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * Technically, there are no sources but every program title is a link to another wikipedia article about that program


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, there are is plenty of linked text to learn more about where the information came from.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, each link leads to a thorough description of what the program is
 * Are the sources current? most of them are other wikipedia articles that were last edited less than 4 months ago, so they are very current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The first one under "proprietary" is broken, but the others are all fine.

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? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, the sections make it easier to narrow down the kinds of programs that are displayed. Some of the items listed, however, say they were discontinued years ago, but are for some reason not in the "retired" section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are no images, but I don't know what kind of images would even be used if there were any. Some of the links display logos or screenshots of the programs in use, but they're all images from the linked articles.
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? I believe this article aims to help people research which programs would be most helpful to the work they personally do.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes, it's a part of the Graphic Design WikiProject. I don't think i's rated.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Full disclosure, I have no idea how to answer that. I don't think we've ever talked about publishing programs in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It serves it's intended function well, but it doesn't feel like a wikipedia article.
 * What are the article's strengths? It has a large number of programs all with links that make them easy to research further
 * How can the article be improved? It could use more text description in the article itself, and maybe be broken up into more sections
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I'm leaning towards poorly. I realize that its a list and that's all it's really supposed to be, but I don't think it fits the description of being an encyclopedia article.

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: