User:Connolly2020/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: Challenger Expedition (Challenger expedition)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it pertains to deep sea biology and I have read it once before for class, so I am somewhat familiar with the material.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * no
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * no

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * no

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No, the sources are not a diverse spectrum, but this is a product of the lack of diversity in deep sea marine exploration.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * no
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * yes
 * 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?
 * yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Discussions about what the Challenger did, as well as its discoveries, are discussed. Also, some of the data represented was questioned due to the usage of "about" and exact numbers.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated C-class, mid-to-low importance depending on which WikiProject you are looking at.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * One part of the talk page discusses the historical usage of female pronouns for ships and how people dislike it. The topic of how women were treated in the past has been discussed in class, but not that ships were described with female pronouns.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article has not been edited for several years. Although there are some questions about what content may be missing/irrelevant, the article seems to be mostly complete.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * provides an extensive, detailed explanation of what the Challenger Expedition was and its significance to the scientific community.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The "Challenger Deep" section could be extended with additional information about the deep sea expeditions it conducted.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I would say the article is reasonably-developed; it provides sufficient information, but it could provide 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: