User:Emmasandell/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
MyPlate

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Nutrition and healthy eating practices have always been an interest of mine which is why I decided to choose this topic. The MyPlate article is not a stub because it has a good layout and information so far, however, it has a lot of room for further in-depth detail about the topic. This topic focuses on nutritional recommendations which is important for everyone's health and food intake. My first impression of the article was that it was only scratching the surface of the topic and can use further research backed with scientific sources.

Evaluate the article
Lead section

A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

·       Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

The introductory sentence describes the article in a very strong way that is simple and accurately explains the topic.

·       Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

This section fails to include a description of the sections that are then referenced later in the article.

·       Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)

The lead does not add excess information that is irrelevant. It does a good job at presenting necessary information that ties back to the topic of the article.

·       Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

The lead is not overly detailed. It is rather short and could be expanded to include further information that will be explained later in the article.

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

·       Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

The content all ties back effectively to the topic and does not include information that is not necessary to backing up the topic.

·       Is the content up-to-date?

The content looks relatively up-to-date, however, it could use more information from the past 5 years at least in order to strengthen the article’s claim.

·       Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

There is a variety of content that can be added to the article in order to make the sections stronger. It could include sections about further nutritional benefits about this food recommendation as well as the breakdown of the actual nutritional breakdown.

·       Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

This article does not deal with equity gaps or underrepresented populations. Instead, it focuses on a healthy diet recommendation that can help individuals change their nutrient intake.

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

·       Is the article neutral?

The article does not take a side in the presentation of the argument. It is very neutral and does not force the enactment of this healthy food intake.

·       Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

There are occasional claims that might make the reader believe that they have to follow MyPlate’s recommendations.

·       Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

The viewpoints are represented equally in order to make for a neutral article

·       Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?

This article does not show many minority viewpoints which could be expanded further

·       Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

The article can be persuading the reader to follow the topic’s recommendations rather than simply explaining what it is about.

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.

·       Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

There are a lot of different sources that help back up the topic.

·       Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

The sources presented seem thorough, although they can be refined properly in order to reflect the best literature on the topic.

·       Are the sources current?

The sources are somewhat current, but the article could be strengthened by adding more relative secondary sources.

·       Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

The sources fail to refer to marginalized individuals which can create a bias in the article writing because it is not considering multiple perspectives.

·       Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

I have found a few other peer-reviewed articles from scientific journals that can serve as a better source in comparison to random websites.

·       Check a few links. Do they work?

The links listed on the article work. There are a good number of sources, however, adding more will many the topic stronger and easier to understand.

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

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

The article is well-written and organized in a way that makes the article easy to understand.

·       Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

The article does not have many grammatical errors that

·       Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

The article is organized very well, however, it could be broken down into further sections that reflect other major points of the topic.

Images and Media

·       Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

The article has two photos that help enhance the understanding of the topic and connect back to the purpose of the article.

·       Are images well-captioned?

The images have some captioning, however, they could be expanded upon in order to enhance the topic more.

·       Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

The images do adhere to the regulations.

·       Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

The images are laid out in a strong way and make it easy to understand more about MyPlate.

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.

·       What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

There are a few conversations about edits and external links that were recently added.

·       How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

The article is rated C-class and a part of the WikiProject Articles for creation, food and drink, and United States/Government

Overall impressions

·       What is the article's overall status?

The article is more complete and stronger than a stub, however, it still has a lot of space for improvement

·       What are the article's strengths?

The article is strong in using secondary sources as well as detailing out the topic at a surface level.

·       How can the article be improved?

The article can be improved by adding new sections that better explain the breakdown of what MyPlate encompasses as well as the nutritional benefits it can have to follow these practices.

·       How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

I think that this article is on its way to being well-developed, but can be improved upon with more details and information.

~.