User:Brynnams/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: Multi-component gas analyzer system
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article to evalute because I am interested in updating it. The articel is also rather short and I feel like it could be expanded and re-organized.

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?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is the entire content of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Fairly up to date, more recent publications would be useful.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes, I think more content could be added.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?4
 * 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

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?
 * More sources and more modern sources should be added.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of them are not.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All links work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Decently written, flow and categorization could be better.
 * 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

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * There is one image with a decent caption, but the image focuses on all instruments used for measurement, distracting from the instrument the article is about.
 * 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.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a Stub. The article is part of WikiProjects Geology.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The articles is a Stub, meaning it needs comprehensive editing.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * All information in the article is well cited.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article shoudl be expanded and given sections. New references should be added.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is poorly developed.

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:Multi-component gas analyzer system