User:Books584/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: (link) List of territories occupied by Imperial Japan
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article to evaluate, because our class has been discussing Imperial Japan and it's colonies.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does.
 * 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? No it does not
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The Lead is very concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * s the article's content relevant to the topic? The content is relevant to the topic
 * Is the content up-to-date? The content is somewhat up to date with the listed sources being from late 1900s to early 2000s
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? While it is hard to say that there is content missing, it is easier to say that there is not enough information in the article.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The article is neutral.
 * 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.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Somewhat, the populstat website does not seem entirely reliable.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The populstat does seem a little suspect, but it does have information on population from the time period.
 * Are the sources current? The sources are around 15 years old and somewhat current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is well written.
 * 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? The article is short, and is organized similar to a list.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, just one though.
 * Are images well-captioned? Not really.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There is only one image, but it's placement is in a good spot.

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 is question as to whether this article list is even needed and if it should instead be merged with other pages that cover similar content.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is rated as a list.  It is part of Wikiproject Japan / Military History and the Wikiproject East Asia.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The way Wikipedia talks about this topic is a more concise but less detailed way.   It only writes down numerical facts.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? This article seems inactive and not that useful.
 * What are the article's strengths? The strengths of the article are that it gathers the colonies of Imperial Japan and puts them down their dates and population.
 * How can the article be improved? This article can be improved by having more updates that make the information more detailed.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that this is a poorly developed 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: