User:Eharps15/Evaluate an Article

Eric: I know you have selected an article and identified spots to add content, you still need to get this drafted, you also have several sandboxes that still need to be developed as representative of the wiki training. Keep working at it and if you need more time, just let me know! - Professor Robinson

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: Cannabis in Canada
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: Cannabis has been a large part of my life as i work in the field and am constantly learning more about the plant and its benefits.

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 for this article does include an introductory sentence that gives the reader a good idea about the information in the article, although is does not give any indication about the articles major sections. It more or less gives a brief history on the legalization process, which is also the second major section in the article. The lead does not include any information that is not present in the article, but it does not include any indication about many of the major sections. The Lead is somewhat over detailed it terms of history and legalization, considering the second point in the article is the "Steps to legalization". it also needs to be altered to give the reader an indication that there is a section about the military and cannabis, as well as cannabis as a commodity.

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
The information in the article is very accurate and relevant to the topic as stated in the title. The information is beneficial and most definitely belongs to the article, especially for someone who is interested in learning about the subject. For many users that are involved with the use/education of cannabis, some of this information may be repetitive and already widely known.

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 written in a neutral tone, there is no opinion based content included in this article. The article gives good information and and takes no specific stance on cannabis in Canada. I didn't find that there was a viewpoint that was represented at all in this article, it is more based upon facts and laws that have been governed, and gives the reader the ability to make their own opinion on the subject based on the facts given.

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 selected 4 links from the references page, 2 of the 4 were from news sources like CBC and Forbes, another source was from an independent website, and the fourth link did not work. Based off of the 4 sources i selected, I could argue that the information is unreliable if I were to make a hasty generalization. While the sources are relevant to the topic of the article, they are not peer-reviewed sources, and they can be bias as they are news articles

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
This article flows well and it clear and concise with the information that is given. As i was reading I did not notice any grammatical and spelling errors, although my grammar is not perfect so there may be some mistakes i didn't pick up on that someone with a higher knowledge of intricate grammar would notice. The article is well-organized as it takes the reader through the history, and legalization process, and how it is now a commodity.

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?

The article begins with a photo of a cannabis leaf on the Canadian flag as opposed to the Maple Leaf, which I think is disrespectful towards our country. To be fair, the other photos throughout the article are accurate towards the content of the article and the are well captioned to add additional understanding.

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
The comments on this page were correcting dates on legalization for cannabis extracts, edibles, and topicals. It is rated for WikiProjects in 3 different variations; it is listed as a C-class with mid importance, and C-class high importance, and a start-class with mid importance.

Overall impression

 * 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 is strong in its accuracy in the dates of legalization, but I think it could be improved in its resources as the few I tried were not entirely reliable, which is an issue for those trying to get accurate, published information. I think that this article can be considered complete in the information it has given, but also incomplete as there is an abundance of information that is missing in terms of cannabis in Canada.

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: