User:Bpigz/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: Anglerfish
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Relate to my research project

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? concise

Lead evaluation
excellent

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? no
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? yes

Content evaluation
excellent

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
excellent

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? yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? one does not, but the rest worked

Sources and references evaluation
very good

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
excellet

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
excellent

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Information were broken down into sections and within each section, editors were being very careful with the wordings and the overall structure of each paragraph in order to present the topic in a better way.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Level-4 vital article. B-class rated. Yes it is part of Food and drink; Fishes; and Fisheries and Fishing WikiProject.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This page listed put the classification of anglerfish and linked wikipages into each class.

Talk page evaluation
very good

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? excellent
 * What are the article's strengths? informative and well-organized
 * How can the article be improved? more pictures and maybe replace some jargons with plain words to make it more user-friendly
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? this is an well developed article given what we know so far about anglerfish

Overall evaluation
excellent

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: