User:Chrisuw/Evaluate an Article

Seattle Channel
I decided to evaluate this article because there is not a lot of existing information on this topic.

Lead

 * Lead Evaluation

The introductory sentence is concise and clearly covers the subject. However, the article does not include any major sections and/or external links for further information. The lead can improve by including more details on the channel.

Content
Content Evaluation

The content is relevant to the topic. It gives a general idea of the subject but needs to be up to date. The article is missing external references like updated programs, history, guests, and awards.

Tone and Balance

 * Tone and balance evaluation

The article is not opinionated so the article is received as neutral. There are no heavy bias or viewpoints that are underrepresented/underrepresented.

Sources and References
Sources and references evaluation

No, the article is not backed up by reliable sources. The article is lacking secondary sources. There are no links.

Organization

 * Organization evaluation

The article is well written but it can be more structured. The sentences do not read fluidly. The organization can improve by breaking the information into sections.

Images and Media
Images and media evaluation

The single image displayed is unrelated to the Lead. The image is not relevant and is outdated. The image is of a program that is broadcasted on the channel. Therefore, it does not fully represent the topic. The image is misleading and lacks appeal.

Checking the talk page
Talk page evaluation

There are no conversations on the talk page. The article is within the scope of WikiProject Washington- Seattle. The article has been rated a stub-class on the quality scale and have yet to receive a rating on the importance scale.