User:Cassie Swackhamer/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: (link)  Food chain
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose to evaluate this article because my major is biology and I believe this will tie in nicely between my major and this gen ed.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?  Yes, the lead sentence gives a descriptive definition on what a food chain is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?    Yes. but there is only one major section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Due to there only being one major section, I believe the lead can be broken down into more sections.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?  As stated before, the article is only the Lead and one major section, so I do believe the Lead is more detailed for the amount of sections given.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?   Yes, everything written is on task.
 * Is the content up-to-date? I believe newer studies could help upgrade the article and add more information.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?   I believe more information/examples can be added.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, there is no bias.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? 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? I believe the sources provided can add more information to the article.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, sources are from multiple different years, including present year.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The Lead feels jammed, but the information is nicely written.
 * 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, I believe the organization needs more work.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?  The two images are on topic.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, easily understood.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? I believe they can be enlarged a bit more given I did not realize they were there until this question.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?  The article needed a clean up a few years back.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Start-class, WikiProject ecology.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?  We have yet to discuss this topic in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Good, but not great.
 * What are the article's strengths? Good information.
 * How can the article be improved? Broken down more.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?  Well-developed, but could have more.

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: