User:Brieannaprasad/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: WikiProject Bodybuilding
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I picked this article because the information is sparse and I recognized some issues regarding the quality of the information immediately

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The article does include a lead sentence however it is very vague.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, it includes a prediction of what is "hoped" the article will accomplish
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The lead only consists of one sentence.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is very vague and does not follow the guidelines of a "quality" article

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes it is relevant with many sub-topics
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * within 2 months; The article was last edited on August 24, 2019.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes there are many sub-categories that are left blank or have biased information

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yes and no; some sections are very neutral and some are biased
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * yes, multiple
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The majority of the viewpoints are underrepresented with little to no information
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Slightly; In some instances the article will you "I feel as if" or " I hope to accomplish".

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The article does include reliable secondary information but not in all facts and sections.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources that are listed are very thorough and proved factual information without any bias or opinionated information
 * Are the sources current?
 * Some sources are current and some are a few years old.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * I clicked 3 links and they all worked and loaded fine.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is well written in some sections however in others is confusing, sparse and opinionated.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * The grammar and spelling of this article is very well edited
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The organization of this article is very planned out and reflects major points within the sections

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes there are a few sections with images that help the reader understand the topic even better by giving visuals.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes the images are very factual and labeled.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I believe so
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes the images caught my attention before the words.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Conversations regarding a surplus of rambling information and trying to keep it straight facts
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is party of a "body building" wikiproject and I am not sure the rating of the article
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The topic has some bias and opinions and rambles a lot

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The overall status is well
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The articles strengths is it broken down into many sections and subtopics and covers all the categories within Bodybuilding
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Less rambling and less bias and opinionated information
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Its a mix between underdeveloped and overdeveloped

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: