User:Caitlinbarr/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: General Hospital of Paris
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Article I'm expanding on.

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 major sections
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? The lead is all the article is
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Lead evaluation
Okay lead but it's missing an article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes but only one source from 1965
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No content that doesn't belong. Much is missing, however.

Content evaluation
Article of two sentences is unsurprisingly weak on content.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The first sentence sounds like it's making an argument
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? As noted above, the potential exists.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Isn't much representation overall.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Yes.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone is not quite right, a bit argumentative, and there's not enough representation of any arguments in the article.

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? No, only one source cited twice
 * Are the sources current? No, still relevant though written in 1965
 * Check a few links. Do they work? No links in the sources

Sources and references evaluation
Sourcing is quite weak.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It's fine in that sense
 * 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? Not much to organize

Organization evaluation
Organization should be added along with the body of an article

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Images and media evaluation
No 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? A few stray comments but no conversations
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Stub; Projects = France/Paris, Correction and Detention Facilities, European history


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It does not go into depth

Talk page evaluation
Pretty sparse

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Stub
 * What are the article's strengths? Accurate info
 * How can the article be improved? Adding more info
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Not developed at all

Overall evaluation
Just a stub

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:General Hospital of Paris