User:Chuongtn/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.


 * Energy policy of Turkey
 * It is the most recent article nominee for WikiProject Environment

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 includes introductory information but it is brief and possibly inadequate.
 * The Lead includes some mention of the article's major sections but not all. It also only lists them and does describe them.
 * The Lead does include information not present in the article, i.e. "Turkey's energy policy has been criticized for not looking much beyond 2023"
 * The Lead is concise but could be written more comprehensively

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
The article's content is relevant to the topic

The content is up-to-date with the oldest cited article being from 2017

Content present is relevant to the topic, in regard to missing content Turkey's Ministry of Foreign Affairs website may have more articles from which to draw from. http://www.mfa.gov.tr/turkeys-energy-strategy.en.mfa

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
The article is neutral.

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
Facts are backed up.

Sources are thorough

Sources are current, oldest source is from 2017

Links work

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?

Organization evaluation
The article is incomplete and has some grammatical errors.

Article is well organized.

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
Info graphics included are well captioned and relevant albeit they are from one source. One photo of a government provided free bag of coal is sourced as "own work" not sure if it is relevant or reliable. Images are not visually appealing, Size is too small to convey importance.

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
No conversations are present.

It is rated C-Class and is part of WikiProjects: Environment, Climate Change, Turkey, and Energy.

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
The article is incomplete. The article's strength lies in the abundance of sources. All of the topics/main points of the article should be further 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: