User:Cocacolaperson/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: A2 CZ Ellipse Spirit
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I am passionate about Airplanes, and there was a long list of airplanes that I have never heard so I choose a random article.

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 of the article mentions the aircraft and gives brief introduction, stated facts of how it is built, and when it first was unveiled. The lead includes a table of contents, but there is no descriptions for the major sections. The information in the lead is also present in the article, with more supporting details. The lead is very short, maybe could use even more detail.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The information about the aircraft is up to date, since the information of this aircraft has not changed since 2011. I do believe that the article is missing more specifications of the aircraft, like max altitude, avionics on board the aircraft, and several other things that would be know about any aircraft that is not mentioned in the article. The article does not deal with an equity gap, and doesn't relate to any underrepresented populations or topics.

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 and just present facts about the aircraft, and does not appear to make any outrageous claims or present any false facts about the aircraft, like cost and performance. The information in the article appears to have very little to no bias since it is just stating what the aircraft includes and some specifications. The article really only keeps one viewpoint which is that of presenting information, there isn't a different viewpoint presented. The author doesn't take a position, so he cannot persuade someone to go one way or the other.

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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
The sources that are presented in the article appear to the be reliable secondary sources of information. The sources include a lot of information about the topic, and there is not a lot of information about this aircraft present, so the articles do a very good job of taking what is available, and synthesizing it into an informative work of literature. The sources are both created after all the information from the manufacturer was given, so the information they include is present. One of the sources is more current than the other and talks about peoples thoughts about the aircraft, but this information is not presented in the article. There are only two sources, so finding sources from more people would be recommended. Both of the sources are books, that I was able to find online after a little searching, and there are no links to check if 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
The article is clear and concise, and does not ramble on about extraneous information or place in unnecessary words. It is very clear and to the point. I was not able to find any spelling or grammar mistakes, but my grammar is not always the best, so it is possible, but does not hinder the readability of the article. The organization of the article is very good, and broken into sections that show the major points of the topic.

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
There is only one image of the plane, and the caption underneath tells you that it is a picture of the aircraft, and gives more information about the aircraft. The picture appears to adhere to the copyright guidelines that wikipedia has. The image is given in a good location at the top of the article and doesn't impact the way that the text is wrapped, so it does not impact the overall look of the article, however more pictures would be nice.

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
There is nothing going on in the talk page, no one has said anything.

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 well-written it provide facts that are all relevant to the topic, and presents them with little to no bias. The article could use more information about what is able on the aircraft, and several more pictures would not hurt. I believe that the article is well 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: