User:BradyDR/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: Contrastive linguistics
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * The article is fairly bare, but there are many examples to clarify what contrastive linguistics is, as well as room for additional research and information to exemplify and elaborate on the topic. I also personally have interest and knowledge in language comparisons in Romance languages that would help add length to the article.

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?
 * There are major sections, but nothing notable as of yet. The page is largely lacking major sections that may be of interest.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the rest of the article mentions specific topics of the article, but not much else beyond a mention followed by a 1-2 sentence explanation.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is very concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Last update was in 2018, more information could be added. References are from the late-1900s as well; no recent research referenced.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There seems to be content missing.

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 over-represented, 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?
 * Yes, though they might be somewhat dated.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Relatively current but there could be more recent papers/research in the reference.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

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, there aren't any more sections beyond "History".

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No.

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 no conversations ongoing.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is generally part of a WikiProject, but not specifically.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * No, they mention all the relevant information that was presented in class to properly evaluate the page.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is a rated as High-importance and as a Start-class project.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is clear in what the term "contrastive linguistics" means and how the term is broken down into specific fields.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Those specific fields could be elaborated further into their own respective subsections. There could also be examples of linguistic contrast throughout the field using specific languages and research that have studied specific languages.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is underdeveloped. More information needs to be added to elaborate on the field.

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:Contrastive linguistics