User:Ckl46/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: (link) Journalistic objectivity
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This is an interesting topic since journalistic objectivity is essential to journalism. I would like to evaluate more on this topic.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it provides an introductory sentence with a definition.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes it mentions it is a discussion of journalistic professionalism.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is detailed

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes it is relevant
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes there are updates in the past few years
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes it is neutral and objective.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I don't think so.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No it is telling some actual facts.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it is just some neutral perspectives on journalistic objectivity.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Most of them follow by a reference.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current? Yes it is recent sources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes they work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is detailed but a little bit long.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? it is well-written.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes it breaks down into different parts like definition, criticism and crowdfunding.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There is only one image which is an interview on "Objectivity does not exist"
 * 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?

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? It is a C-Class acticle.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It provides a more deeper knowledge on journalistic objectivity because it provides more information on the topic. Class time are limited.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths? It gives a detailed information on the topic journalistic objectivity.
 * How can the article be improved? Provides more sources and information on how to maintain journalistic objectivity.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly 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: