User:Cecethack/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: Facial Coding
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This week have talked about how our brain process different things, including facial coding and how we evaluate people. How we tell that someone is mad or sad, and this article talks about this. It starts with the history and how Darwin said that facial expressions are universal, which was later to be found true. And how technology has had a big impact and has made lots of progress in the facial coding and all the facial expressions that humans make.

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 was good, they define what facial coding is. It talks about the basics of facial coding and how they can use computers to record facial recognition. There was nothing in lead that was not in the rest of the article. It was pretty concise it was less then three lines, which is nice, it could have been a little bit more detailed.

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?

Content evaluation
This article was full of relevant things to what the title and lead talk about. It only talks about the progress that facial coding has made sense Darwin. It was not very long but very informative. The references are from of course Darwin from 1872 and it most resent reference was 2015, so it might need to have a few things updated. I don't really know how much progress this has made sense 2015. There was nothing there that did not need to be there, and I don't think anything was missing.

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
I would not say that it is neutral and favors more toward facial coding and the benefits it has. And what it has done for society. There is nothing overly bias, just gives you the facts about facial coding.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All the sources seemed to be reliable, and were backed up. None of them looked like they are fake. They are very well rounded and are what the article needed. The majority of them are current, except a few, but those were used in the history section. The links worked.

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?

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
There was no images used in this article.

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
I could not find any conversations about this particular article. I also did not see any ratings on this article. And I don' t think it is part of any WikiProjects. It was more of an overview very informative just like how we have talked about it in class. It does not go into much detail, but just enough that you know what it is talking about.

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 thought this article was very interesting and informative. It taught me more about facial coding and how it came about and research that it going on now. The history section was the best section, it taught me the most. It could probably have more information about things being done today. It could be updated a little, its not outdated but I bet there is some new research that could be added.

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:Facial coding