User:Cam Structure/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: (De'VIA)
 * I chose this article because it is very relevant to Deaf culture and the Deaf community but without infringing upon more sensitive topics that should be reserved for members of the Deaf community.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

Yes the Lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly and concisely describes the topic. It mentions some of the article's but not every major section. It does not include information that is not present in the article from what I can discern. The lead is very concise.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

Yes the article's content is relevant to the topic. From what I can tell the article is up to date. The article has not pictures and is not very detailed but is mentions the main important information.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article seem mostly neutral. No there do not seem to be any biased claims. The article does not heavily touch upon the history of De'VIA art. No the article does not attempt to persuade a reader.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

It seems that the sources are fairly reliable however it only uses 6 sources that are heavily repeated. However the deafart.org one is good source it does not have peer reviewed information. one of the links does not work and many of the articles were written anywhere from 5 - 21 years ago.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well written, it is clear and concise. It does not have any errors that I can see. Yes it is well organized.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

No images are included.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

there is no conversation and it does not have a rating yet. It seems to have been edited in the past by other students of this class and was created as a Wiki edu project. It seems the article is discussed very similarly to how we discuss the topic in class, perhaps we do it with little more passion and bias.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

I thought the article was good despite its length. It is not biased and provides good overarching topics however it can be improved with the use of resources and images, while also going more in-depth in some of the topics. I would say the article is on the way to being well-developed.


 * 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?

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: