User:BoomerSooner1101/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: Aristotle
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because Aristotle plays a large role in our course for previously accepted explanations of our cosmos.

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? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Rather long, but concise relative to all of Aristotle's accomplishments.

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? Not that I can see.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? It does not directly address these topics, as it addresses a powerful Greek man in antiquity.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not that I detect
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not particularly.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Not that I can interpret.

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
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The sources themselves are diverse in origin, but I am unsure of all of the source authors' identities and their relation to Aristotle.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links are functional, yes!

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Very.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I can detect.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Indeed it is.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes it does.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes; quite descriptive.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? From what I can tell, yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? They are.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? General date designations, some broken HTMLs, and a missing piece of information in a subsection.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated "Good" and is of interest for many WikiProjects!
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We discuss the ideas presented in the course as fact and evaluate them with present-day understanding, while these discussions are based on accuracy and validity of information given. These discussions are less analytical of Aristotle's ideas themselves.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is a very strong article.
 * What are the article's strengths? Informational accuracy, volume of information, well-maintained, well-sourced.
 * How can the article be improved? Fixing some issues mentioned in the Talk page; fix some source HTMLs, fix date notations, and some informational chunks missing.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is very well-developed and properly maintained by popular interest.

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 — ~ Okay!


 * Link to feedback: