User:DirtGal/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.


 * Onondaga Cave State Park
 * This state park is a favorite place of mine, because of the interesting geochemistry behind the formation and the many different active regions of the cave. The article focuses heavily on the history of the cave, but doesn't really go into the the different formations inside of the cave or the formation processes of the cave itself.

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?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is probably lacking important information

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * There is no content about current operations of the cave.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The article is missing content about current operations of the cave, the geologic formations in the cave, and the caves ecology. There is a section of the Vilander Bluff Natural Area, which I'm not sure is completely relevant to the article.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No. The article doesn't even address the native tribe that the cave is named after.

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 pretty neutral in tone, even when discussing a controversial dam that was built in the area that would have flooded 80% of the cave. The article simply walked through the history the controversies and where they ended today.

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
Pretty much the entirety of the history section uses one source and all of the sources come from the Missouri Department of Conservation, so there is not much variety in the sources of the 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 might have some weird wording here and there, but overall I feel like its fairly well written and well organized.

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
Two of the images are of rock formations, which are not discussed at all in the article. Both of these images are photos taken by individuals who uploaded them to wikipedia, so there is no source given for the images. All of the images are missing appropriate citations.

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 no conversations that are ongoing on the Talk page. The article is related to three different WikiProjects: Missouri, National Register of Historic Places, and Protected Areas.

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
I think this article needs a lot of work. The history that they give is very good (very similar to what they would give on a tour), but they only use one source for the whole section. There is no information about the geologic formations of the cave or the ecology of cave which should definetely be added to improve this article. Overall, I would classify this article as poorly 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: