User:Cgk38/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: (Environmental Anthropology)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * It is a C class article that looked interesting to me, because I don't know much about it

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead in sentence introduces the topic well.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, the lead only has one sentence, so there isn't much overview
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, there is very little in the lead
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Very concise, could probably add a little more detail.

Lead evaluation
There is not much lead, but what is there is clear and concise. The introduction sentence defines the topic, but there's no further description or information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Somewhat, the analysis of changes in the field stop at the 1990s, and the more recent side of that is under explained and under cited.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There are red links for some of the anthropologists and the evolution of the field seems underdeveloped.

Content evaluation
The article is full of relevant information, but the information about the history and current status of the field is a bit lacking. More can be done to fill in these gaps and provide more sources.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes!
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Not particularly
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * There are certain perspectives that are discussed more in depth than others, but it might be due to the prevalence of those voices in the field.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of the article is fairly neutral and unbiased. Certain perspectives are represented more than others, but that might be more of a function of the field's narrowness than anything else.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The sources are mostly peer reviewed journals.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are lengthy and pretty substantive.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of the sources are from 10 years ago or older.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes!

Sources and references evaluation
The links to the sources work and they are good sources. They manage to provide accessible, throughout sources. However, they are a bit out of date.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * Yes

Organization evaluation
The organization is pretty good. The formatting, writing and grammar looks good.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There are no images
 * 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 are no images in the article. Visuals should be added to improve the communication of the message.

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 is very little on the talk page
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a C class article
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This topic has no gender assignment so it doesn't incorporate any of the common mistakes that occur when writing about women.

Talk page evaluation
This is a C-class article without much action on the talk page. It seems that this page would benefit from more attention, especially with people familiar with the field.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is not bad, but could use a major update.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article presents the information pretty clearly.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article could use more content and more modernization for the current year.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is well-developed, but under-developed.

Overall evaluation
What has been done for this article has been good quality. However, it could use a bit of an expansion, especially incorporating recent developments in the field to make it more comprehensive.

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: