User:Csbundy2525/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
(Provide a link to the article here.)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead section
A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.


 * 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? (It shouldn't.)
 * No
 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise
 * Good lead section that gives the audience the main idea of who Cheryl Day is and what her accomplishments are. Not too specific but not too broad.

Content
A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.


 * 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?
 * Seems like there is no missing content. Everything in this article belongs here.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes. Addresses her co-founding "Southern restaurants for Racial Justice" - an organization which "advocates for for workers of colour in the food industry"

Tone and Balance
Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.


 * 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
 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
 * Yes
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
 * No. A lot of the sources posted on the page are interviews and detailed articles about Charyl Day and her life. No random websites.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes
 * Sources are very organized and it is clear that research as been done on Ms. Day and her life. These sources are very useful to find out who she is and what her accomplishments are. It seems like there is no random websites and all the sources are trustworthy.

Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * 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. The article is broken down into 5 sections. First, the introduction. Second, the biography. Third, the publications. Fourth, the references, and fifth, the external links. All these sections are organized and contribute to the page.
 * This page is well-written and is not too wordy at all. The organization makes it easy to read and learn more about Ms. Day.

Images and Media

 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes (an image)
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * No
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes
 * There is only one image and it is a picture of Ms. Day in her bakery. This gives me a good idea what she looks like, as well as the state that she is in. She seems very happy to live out her dream of working/owning a bakery.

Talk page discussion
The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The image on this page has been "nominated for deletion"
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article is rated "start-class, low-importance", and there are eight other wikiprojects linked to this page.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * I've noticed the publications page and how it gives the three different publications she has been involved in. I really haven't noticed this section until now.

Overall impressions

 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The overall status is good and it does enough to give the audience information about the life of Ms. Day and how she became a well-known bakery owner.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The strengths are her biography and being detailed about how she became to be an owner of a bakery.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be improved by talking more about what Ms. Day has done in her community and how she has helped the less fortunate through work with the Bakery. I think it gives too much information on her accomplishments. Also add more images that show the bakery or even what she makes.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It seems to be pretty complete and well-developed.

Examples of good feedback
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.


 * Peer review of this article about a famous painting