User:Emmaaitelli/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) Dime Store Cowgirl
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have chosen to evaluate this article because it was a stub on wikipedia, it has limited references, and also provides limited information about the song, the artist, and the lyrical interpretation of the song.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * Lead looks good (more issues with content)


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? YES
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? YES
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? YES
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? YES

Lead evaluation
Strong lead, just missing content within the format of the article

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? more information about recent projects, more information about lyrical information
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Content evaluation
The content in the article is good it could just use more information.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
Very balanced and factual

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? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Could update some sources but the ones they have are still factual/applicable to the piece.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * 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

Organization evaluation
Good organization, easy to build off of

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, but there could be more
 * 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? Yes but again, could be more

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? N/A no conversations
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? part of the Country Music wikiproject which is inactive
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Status is a stub
 * What are the article's strengths? Good organization and lead
 * How can the article be improved? Adding more information, images, and sources
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that it's in need of updating, outdated

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: