User:Bronickin/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: Politics in education
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose this article to evaluate because the topic is particularly interesting to me as someone studying government, and after seeing the article I think there is a lot that could be improved so it's a good article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead defines relevant terms, but it does not make it clear what the focus of the article is about. Since there are no major sections, the article doesn't explain what they are. I think in general it has too many specific definitions in the lead and not enough clear information about the subject itself.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The article does not have enough content. I think it could potentially relate to equity gaps because the topic of politics in education should relate to how various communities are misrepresented and the sometimes inaccurate historical information that is taught in schools.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is very neutral; it is entirely fact based.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The links work but there are not enough citations in this article; in fact, Wikipedia has flagged it as requiring more citations.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is well written, just lacking in organization since it is so sparse.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
The article does not include any images.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
A lot of the conversations on the talk page are simply article evaluations like this one. There are a few comments making the same posts I am about the lack of content and sources, but no one is filling those gaps. It was part of several WikiProjects, but it seems like little progress has been made on it. I was surprised to see that people have been commenting on its flaws, and yet it has not been edited in over a year.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
I would say this article needs work. It requires more citations and the content section is underdeveloped. However, I think the topic is very interesting so I hope someone finds the time to edit it soon.

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: