User:Datpao/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: Business education
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this because I've recently become fascinated with the field of business and how it's being taught in higher education.


 * Guiding questions
 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, it interprets what business education is and basically outlines the contents of the article, which are the different levels of business education.
 * 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?
 * It's concise.

Lead evaluation
It's great. Tone is formal. No weird errors here. Straight to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes. August 26, 2020.
 * 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 and no.

Content evaluation
It's great. The undergrad, postgrad, and doctoral education sections each list out all the common business degrees offered at each level. The internships and career development sections are clear and concise.

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.

Tone and balance evaluation
No bias. Neutral. Good job, Wikipedia.

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?
 * Yes. No.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Sources and references evaluation
Yes, they're relevant.

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, well from what I can see.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes.

Organization evaluation
great

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There's only one but it does it.
 * 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?
 * No, because there's only one.

Images and media evaluation
Needs more images.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Where to add links regarding business school contributions and formal education
 * Recent comment about a need to update the article with new disciplines
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Yes, falls under Education and Business.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * More formal and neutral in scope.

Talk page evaluation
I like how different people bring in something new into the talk page.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall, I'd give it a solid 9/10.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Organization according to level of education as well as work opportunities
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More images, updates about new disciplines
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Well-developed

Overall evaluation
I liked the article. The terminology was nice and simple for me to understand.

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: