User:BlandK/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article[edit]
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (Postgraduate research)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because I am a senior undergrad and this is relevant to me.

Lead[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes. It defines postgrad research as a formal area of study and where one typically conducts such research.
 * 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.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? concise.

Lead evaluation[edit]

 * Pretty good, some clarifying phrasing could help.

Content[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes. last edited on 10.30.2019
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? not that I know of.

Content evaluation[edit]
One of the shorter wiki articles, but all the info is there, I think.

Tone and Balance[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation[edit]
Very balanced

Sources and References[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? yes. the history section only has two citations on the last two paragraphs, some others should be added to the first three.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes. Some information was taken from universities themselves (for the structure section). This is fine but these weren't you're average public university schools--cambridge, harvard, Upenn, etc.
 * Are the sources current? yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? https://icmr.nic.in/ifc_research.htm this one doesn't and this http://cambridge.net/us/harvard-academics-courses-research/ is currently down

Sources and references evaluation[edit]
decent sources, maybe not the best given your audience. one source didn't work and another cite is temporarily down--the cambridge cite.

Organization[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Generally, yes.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? None noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Organization evaluation[edit]
Good. Some clarifying phrasing adjusments could be useful

Images and Media[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? no
 * 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

Images and media evaluation[edit]
N/A

Checking the talk page[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? this is a wikiproject article. the question right now is "what is the postgrad tradition in Europe?"
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? WikiProject Education -- STUB
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I don't think we've talked about postgrad research in class. The wikipedia article discusses it differently from other ways postgrad research has been presented to me before, though. The article does not mention anything about IRB boards and approvals, funding, mentors, etc. Often when someone talks to me about research, these things are mentioned.

Talk page evaluation[edit]
doesn't seem too high on the wikiproject eduation to-update list

Overall impressions[edit]

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * STUB - the information that is present is accurate, but it seems a little haphazardly thrown together. Some cleaning up is needed as well as some more sections added, maybe.
 * What are the article's strengths? the information that is presented is accurate. The paragraph about postgrad research not necessarily being an "invention" or "discovery" is absolutely important, necessary, and often overlooked.
 * How can the article be improved? Some cleaning up is needed as well as some more sections added, maybe. I think the structure section information should also come from public universities not just ivys. on the talk page someone asked what the postgrad tradition is in Europe, that could also be added.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped.

Overall evaluation[edit]
poorly and underdeveloped.

Optional activity[edit]

 * 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: posted a question