User:Bonnie Weglin/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: Ficelle
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because there are no references and very little information of the history behind the origin of this bread. The article is only two sentences long.

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?
 * No, there are no sections within this article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, it does not.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is relatively concise, including a description of what the item is as well as the basic components of it. Also including the origin of the name.

Lead evaluation
The Lead is decent but the information presented could be elaborated upon in a section format.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, all content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * All content included belongs. However, there seems to be a lot of information missing which otherwise could be included.

Content evaluation
The content within this article is minimal.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * None apparent
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Not notably.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Tone and balance evaluation
Little information provided so tone and balance are hard to judge.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No facts are backed up by sources. There are links to other wiki articles, but that's it.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No sources provided.
 * Are the sources current?
 * No sources provided.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Links to other wiki pages work.

Sources and references evaluation
None present

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?
 * No organization into sections, just two sentences.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, one image.
 * 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, simple layout of side of page.

Images and media evaluation
Image is related and good

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are few conversations happening, mainly on just what people have added, no disagreements.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated Low and a Stub.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It provides very little information and sources.

Talk page evaluation
Not much activity.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Underdeveloped.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Easy to get a fast understanding.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More information can be added and sources could be included.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Highly underdeveloped.

Overall evaluation
In general there's much more that can be added to this in multiple categories.

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: Talk:Ficelle