User:Dns2018/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: (link) Kaqchikel language
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because there is not much "discussion" over the topic. I wish to expand on the article and bring light to a language that has been devalued.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * How the language is structured and vocally pronounced?
 * What is the history of the language and how was it developed?


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the article gives a precise definition of where the language originated and the proper name.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No brief description, but the sections are labeled.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No everything the lead introduced in is discussed throughout the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Very concise, but could be expanded on more.

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * Where the language originated?
 * What is the history of the language in the region?
 * How the language is read?
 * Where is it spoken?


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, all the content is related to the main topic of the article.
 * Is the content up-to-date? I would say the history is up-to-date, but there aren't any new updates or how the language has been maintained over time. In other words, is it still spoken today or has it been suppressed due to institutions?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? How the language is viewed as now or is it still in use today?

Content evaluation
Overall, the article covers the framework of the language and the history. Since it has not been updated in terms of how the language is used today can be fixed by reading different published author work over the topic. A deeper analysis can be made to have a better understanding of the language and culture.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Since the article is explaining the history and how the language is structure the tone is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No viewpoint that is overrepresented, however the history isn't very specific.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the tone and balance was neutral and it did not try to persuade or over exaggerate any specific view point. The history could be expanded more in terms of details and current events.

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? No
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Only a couple of them work, not all.

Sources and references evaluation
The sources used seem to be out of date and a couple links do not work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Easy to read and great explanation for the structure of the language.
 * 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 subsections and a basic overview of each topic.

Organization evaluation
Organization of the article is clear and appropriate for the topic.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No.
 * 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? No.

Images and media evaluation
There are hardly any images, however there are graphs and charts to visually explain the language history/use.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? An article was proposed in 2006 over the language and the new current events.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is apart of five other developing project.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There isn't a major difference, however the way the article was organized for this specific topic is different.

Talk page evaluation
Overall, there hasn't been much discussion over the topic.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? A low importance.
 * What are the article's strengths? Overall a well basic definition of the language and history, but a bit outdated.
 * How can the article be improved? New information or research that can be included.
 * 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
Overall, the article gives the general idea of the topic, but since language evolves overtime I do think there needs to be more recent research studies included to see how it Is used today.

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: Talk:Kaqchikel language