User:Ecardon3/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)
 * Flag of England
 * Church of England
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I am interested in both of these articles because I love England all aspects of it. I'd love to learn more about their history (through the flag and their church) which is why I'm interested in adding to these articles and helping to improve them.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * It has a decently clear Lead sentence though it could maybe explain the topics it discusses in regards to the English flag more.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, I'll need to add that.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes. It discusses how it is widely used now "especially at sporting events." This needs to be discussed further down in the article or taken out completely.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It's definitely concise; it might need a bit more information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the topics go well with the main article discussion.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * I will need to check. It's missing a lot of citations so some of it's information might be potentially false.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Some of the sections are small or in need of more sources or information in general. I like the headers that are there but I'll need to find more sources and add more information to certain sections, particularly the final sections.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * It seems to be very neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * Definitely viewpoints that are underrepresented at the bottom that I can fix.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Not that I'm aware of currently, but I'll read through it more thoroughly as time goes on.

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?
 * 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?

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?

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?

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?

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: