User:Dkmills28/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: Telephone
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have chosen this article to evaluate because I know there is a lot of history to the telephone and it is still something that is evolving. I also know that personally, it is difficult for me to write using unbiased words and adjectives. I feel as though with the telephone page I can talk without being biased and just state the facts.

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
The Lead includes an introductory sentence that well describes the topic. The definition and origin of the telephone is very clear in the first sentence. I don't think the Lead really introduces any sections that will be in the article. It is more just an overview of who invented the telephone and its features. There is a very clear history in the Lead, but that's about all. No. The Lead includes information that is mostly in the Principles, Details of operation, and History sections of the article. I think the lead contains what you need to know about the telephone at first glance. It has a lot of great information, but maybe could use less detail that could be saved for another section.

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?

Content evaluation
I think the content that is in the article is very relevant to the topic, especially the details of operation and history. I think it's important to include the origin of the telephone. Another section that I felt useful and relevant was the section about the digital telephone and the mobile telephone. It's interesting and useful to know how the device started and to see where it has evolved to now. I think the mobile telephone section could use some updating. It's a short section and its last statistic is numbers from 2009. Adding more to the mobile telephone section could be useful and something that might be worth adding. I think everything that's in the article belongs there.

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 speaks in a neutral tone. No claims seem to be heavily biased toward a particular side. I think when it comes to the telephone there isn't too much of a side to take. It isn't persuasive, it just states the facts about the telephone.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
I think the sources have an okay range of dates. Some of them date back to the 70s and others are from 2018 and 2016. There could be some more current sources, which I would like to add. The links that I checked work and lead to books and articles that appear scholarly.

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
I find this article easy to follow and read. The sections make it easy to navigate what one might be looking for and really breaks up the article well. There is a timeline of early development in the History section which makes following the improvements made the the telephone easy to understand. The sections highlight the major points of the article.

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
Some of the images in the article enhance my understanding and help to better visualize what the telephone looked like at a certain period of time. It's one thing to read a description of the telephone and be able to put together an image in your mind based on prior knowledge, but it's helpful to have the images along the side to show what the telephone looked like. However, there are other images that don't really enhance my understanding, they are just interesting to look at. There is a photo of Alexander Graham Bell placing the first phone call in the article. This image shows a really important and monumental moment, but aside from being something intriguing to look at, I don't see much of a purpose for it. The images are laid out on the side, which I think is more appealing than interrupting the flow of the article.

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
This article is a C-Class article and is a level 3 vital article in the Technology section. In the talk page, I see a lot of discussion about the credit of the telephone invention. It seems like they give the main credit to Bell, and mentions the others that are credited with the invention in the timeline. I understand why this would be such a discussion on the talk page, because it's important to give credit to who really invented the telephone. I remember also having this discussion in class how the telephone isn't the only invention where who the inventor really was gets a little hazy. It's hard to say who really deserves credit for the invention.

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
The article's strengths include its clarity when it comes to sections. This makes it easy to follow and to find what the reader is looking for. The article has a very neutral tone that doesn't persuade or take sides. However, I find some of the sections to be quite lengthy when it comes to going into detail about the telephone. Things like the early commercial instruments section was hard to follow at times because it went into such detail about small pieces of the telephone. Some of the images could use improvement. I think the mobile telephone section could also be updated and added to. I think the article is developed, but could definitely use some trimming in places and additions in others. I think it deserves the C-Class rating where it would provide a general overview, but doesn't really give a complete picture.

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: