User:Chelsea.nakayama/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: Attachment theory
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article to evaluate because I think it is interesting how much our early relationships affect the rest of our lives.  Attachment theory explains how those relationships with caregivers are important.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes- It clearly defines attachment theory and its importance
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes- each section is clearly described.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No- the lead covers only information that is found within the article except for some of the overview information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It was detailed but not overly so.  The details helped to create a foundation for the rest of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? The content is relevant to the subject matter. It goes into detail on the many different types of attachment.
 * Is the content up-to-date? It seems to be.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? I think indirectly. Most people who fall into the underrepresented populations would likely suffer from a form of attachment disorder.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, it was informative but not preachy.
 * 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 the article provides facts but doesn't sway the reader either direction, although I am not sure it would be possible to be in favor of attachment issues

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, many other sources are cited
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Many women researchers are cited.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links lead to the proper pages.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is concise and well written. There is a lot of information but it never felt overwhelming.
 * 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? Yes, the article flowed well from one topic to the next.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, the article has many pictures throughout.
 * Are images well-captioned? yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? The images are laid out well and are good representations of the section within which they apear.

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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths? I think that the article is well written and informative.  It was well researched and unbiased.
 * How can the article be improved? I think that the article could be improved by including personal experiences with the avoidance patterns.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I think the article is well 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: