User:BoNeApPlEtEa42/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: Amazon river dolphin ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_river_dolphin )
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

- I chose this article because it's a Start-Class article and I'm interested in the topic.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


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

Lead evaluation
The Lead is concise and not too detailed, providing a decent, if not great, overview of the information presented later in the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? ((Yes))
 * Is the content up-to-date? ((Yes))
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? ((2 of the cited sources have missing urls))

Content evaluation
The content is detailed, relevant, and up-to-date, but not all of the cited sources actually have urls.

Tone and Balance

 * 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
The tone of the article is well-balanced and neutral.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


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

Sources and references evaluation
The facts in the aryicle are all backed up by reliable sources and references, this there still remains the issue that some have missing urls.

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))

Organization evaluation
The article is well-written and organized, with little grammatical errors, if any.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Images and media evaluation
The images are well-captioned and well-placed in relation to the topic being discussed, all adhering to the copyright regulations of Wikipedia.

all adhering to the copyright regulations of Wikipedia.,

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? ((Possible photos anyone has of the dolphin, whether the dolphin's name should be listed in every possible language, etc.))
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? ((Start-Class; Yes))
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? ((Wikipedia's far more focused, I suppose. Since there's an actual topic, and it's one they've all done their research on, everyone knows exactly what they're looking for when they ask about/for it.))

Talk page evaluation
The talk page shows that the editors behind the article are mature and well-versed in the topic and know what to ask about/for.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? ((Start-Class))
 * What are the article's strengths? ((It's detailed, well organized, and operates well within Wikipedia's rules.))
 * How can the article be improved? ((Urls for all of the sources that lack one.))
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? ((It is well-developed, but there's room for improvement.))

Overall evaluation
The article is well-crafted, organized, and careful to adhere to Wikipedia's rules. Though there is room for improvement, it's certainly very nice in quality and quantity.

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: