User:Crook47/Evaluate an Article

London Flu Evaluation
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: :London Flu
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

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
There is a rather brief introduction giving very few but integral details of the outbreak.

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
As far as I know, based on what little research I did to familiarize myself with the subject matter, the information that is already there is accurate but sparse. While reading the introductory information I had a sneaking suspicion that there's more information available however it's just not listed in the article.

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
There is an absence of tone other than informational as an outbreak is difficult to find bias in. There weren't really any viewpoints represented other than general statistics that vary from country to country based on the transmission rates.

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
About every sentence is sourced correctly including specific facts in the Lead information.

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 extremely sparse so organization-wise it's fine for what it is. However, as information is added the article should be reformatted to represent new information sections like I listed in my reflection question.

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 were literally no images or media.

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 were no conversations being discussed when I initially began my evaluation.

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
Overall the article is extremely sparse, however I'm unable to tell if that's due to the relatively miniscule effect that it had on society at the time. Or if that's due to the fact that the initial author of the article hasn't put any effort into finding sources for information since beginning the initial Lead information for the page. It is underdeveloped but started off well. In general, the article just needs the work to add other interesting facts and explain the world climate during the time of the outbreak and the effects of the outbreak on society.

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: