User:Cloudwind80/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: Jeju Island
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article to evaluate because it is directly related to my Paper 2 topic: Jejueo and its revitalization. Jeju Island is where a large majority of Jejueo speakers live, and the island is intertwined with the language (culture, economy, society, etc).

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 does include a very general introductory sentence about where Jeju Island is in relation to the rest of the world. The lead also touches upon the rest of the article's major sections but does not explicitly list or explain them. The lead does not contain information that is not present in the article, and is concise and easy to read.

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 content of the article is all directly related to the topic of the article. It discusses everything from the history of the island to its major industries, serving as a good guide to anyone looking for more information about the island. The content seems fairly up-to-date, with the most recent cited source being from 2016. All of the topics seem to be pretty fleshed out so I don't believe there is content that does not belong or is missing.

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's overall tone is neutral, and after reading it I did not find any statements that were heavily biased or charged with emotion. All of the viewpoints in the article seem to be presenting facts without bias and does not try to persuade the reader towards the author's opinion. It is a good source of factual information about Jeju Island.

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?

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
Yes, the article's prose is very easy to read and is concise. The sentences get to the point without having complex clauses or too much extra "fluff". After reading it, I did not catch any spelling or grammar errors and I believe it is well organized into important sections that any reader would be interested in.

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
Since Jeju Island is known for its volcanic scenery a majority of the photos in this article are of the mountains. While this certainly enhances our understanding of the natural scenery of the island, I think more images of the naval base or other facilities would be nice as well. The captions are good as they are concise and provide the reader with the necessary information. The photos in the "Geography" section are all bunched together so I think it would be a bit more aesthetically pleasing if they were spaced out a bit more.

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
Most of the conversations on this page are regarding the validity of certain pieces of content and additions of photos into the article. The article is rated as Start-Class and is a part of WikiProject Korea, WikiProject East Asia and WikiProject Islands. There hasn't been any discussion of Jeju Island in class, so unfortunately I do not have anything to compare the article to.

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 has been listed as a level-4 vital article and is involved in multiple WikiProjects. I think this article does a great job at covering all of the bases of anything a reader would want to know about Jeju Island and presents it in a concise and easy-to-read way. This article could be improved aesthetically with the movement of pictures and I think updating the article with some newer sources would help. I think this article is pretty well-developed since it's not just a skeleton of an article with a lead and some subsections, but some sections could definitely be developed a bit more.

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: