User:Cheryzk/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: Neurophyics
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. The title of the article peaked my interse. I have never heard of neurophyics before. So, I wanted to learn something new and exciting.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?        Yes, it was to the point. Neurophyics looks at the biophyics of the nervous system.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?    No, it was basic and only listed techniques used in neurophyics.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?    The article is, unfortunately lacking imformation.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?       Very concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?       I cant say, due to lack of information.
 * Is the content up-to-date?     No.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?     There is content missing.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?           Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?    No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?             There are no viewpoints.
 * 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?      n/a
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?      n/a
 * Are the sources current?         I am unable to determine that.
 * 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?          It is easy to read, but it is missing information.
 * 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, given the information

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?           No images are included on the page.
 * Are images well-captioned?            N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?           N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?           N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? I didnt see much.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is a stub in the WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I have never heard of neurophyics.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Stub
 * What are the article's strengths? Needs more work.
 * How can the article be improved? Needs more info
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? very underdeveloped.

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: