User:Ehaught/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)
 * Ant
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * It pertains to the course and I have never read about ants before. It is also a featured article, so I thought that looking on one of these to evaluate would be better than looking at an article in progress.

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 a very concise sentence that briefly states the ants' Family and other characteristics.


 * The Lead includes a few brief descriptions of all of the article's major sections.
 * The Lead has no information that is different or not present in the rest of the article. Instead, the Lead includes brief overviews of everything that is discussed in further detail.
 * The Lead is concise for every 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
The articles content is very relative to the topic and never strays. The content is up to date with the most recent information being cited from a source that was published in January of 2018. There is no content that is missing or content that does not belong as of recently.

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 neutral and unbiased with no persuasion.There are no viewpoints overrepresented or underrepresented.

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
All facts are backed up by at least one reliable source of information. The sources are all thorough and reflect the literature stated in the article. The sources are very current and the links 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?

Organization evaluation
The article is very concise, clear, and easy to read and understand. There are no grammatical or spelling errors present. The article is well-organized and has clear distinctive sections where information can be easily found.

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
The images are well placed and captioned. All images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations and are 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?

Talk page evaluation
There are some talks about the different temperature regions ants locate in and editors have shared papers to clear up confusion. There are some grammatical debates on the talk page. the article is rated as "featured article" and is part of "Wikiprojects Insects". Wikipedia breaks down the ants into very specific sections and sometimes gives an even more indepth view of the topic and then can also relate it back to such a broad scope.

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 articles overall status is very good and is a featured article. The article's strengths are the amount of sources and material covered within the article. The article can only be improved with more research to become more specific on temperature regions. The article is very well-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: