User:E razo0821/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:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toothpaste&action=edit&section=1
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Im a pre-dent student and dental assistant

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes but it could have been worded differently
 * 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? yes, in "usefulness " section it describes a systematic review about how it is not useful to brush teeth. Author did not expand much information about it. Personally I think information is misleading.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? not too much, in fact certain information presented needed to be more detailed for public to understand. Noticed that a-lot of information was not cited. there are a few sections where wiki suggested citations already.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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? yes, more information about usefulness of toothbrushing. The current content under usefulness is actual "controversy"

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no article is pretty neutral and informational, some information seems to be unintentionally misleading.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? usefulness section
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no but it does contain misleading information

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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? No. Most paragraphs need to be re-structured and re-worded for better understanding to reader.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? yes quite a few
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? it is broken down into sections but I believe that needs better organization

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? yes, but images seemed a bit outdated.
 * 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, adding image at the beginning of article created a huge empty space, it could have been placed at a different location to make article look more appealing.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? conversations regarding poor wording of content, misleading information, NAZI CIA influence
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is Rated B. and Yes is is part of WikiProjects: Dentistry, Health and fitness
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I think people making comments on talk section are very polite about suggested changes.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Needs more supportive information, organization and grammatical improvement.
 * What are the article's strengths? good information about history of tooth paste and ingredients
 * How can the article be improved? adding citations, better organization and fixing grammatical errors.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped, it is a great start.

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: