User:Eplogger/Evaluate an Article

Mortuary archaeology
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (link)
 * Mortuary archaeology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because I have always loved learning about the field of Forensics and how Crime Scene Analysts are able to learn a lot about crimes from DNA and the human body and it seemed like that is pretty similar to Mortuary archaeology because bioarchaeologists examine human remains to determine information about what the person whose skeleton they are studying was like and how they lived.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise.

Lead evaluation
The lead is brief but informative. There is a short description covering the major topics that will be discussed in 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?
 * No

Content evaluation
The content of the article is descriptive and pertinent to the topic of Mortuary archaeology.

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
The tone and balance of the article is good, there are no points being presented that are trying to bias the reader in anyway.

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.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Some of the links work but there are several that don't.

Sources and references evaluation
There are several links that do not work, so I will have to take a look at them.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, the article flows good and is easy to comprehend, while being informative.
 * 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, there are several sections that have sub sections and that helps give the article a cohesive flow.

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article is the probably the biggest strength of it. I will go back over it several times to make sure the organization and flow stays good when I edit and draft.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * N/A
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

Images and media evaluation
There are currently no images in the article, but I will be adding some of archaeologists examining human remains and of a burial being excavated.

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
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as C - Class and as High Importance.
 * 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?
 * The overall status is that the article has a solid foundation that just needs to be improved on to increase the overall quality. Images need to be added, sources need to be double-checked, and links to work.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The organization and the amount of information it covers on the topic of Mortuary archaeology.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Images can be added, sources can be checked, and more links can be in working condition.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is extremely well-developed in my opinion. There are always improvements that can be made though.

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: