User:Evaholly/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) Intersectionality
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because it relates to my TIMOB digital campaign.

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 is well-written and sets the tone for what is to come in the remainder of the page. In the first few sentences, it explains what it will be addressing and contains links to go directly to the section - which is extremely user friendly. It is concise and incorporates just the right amount of information that is to be discussed later.

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 content of the article is superb. It hits all the major topics regarding Intersectionality - including the psychology behind it and how it has evolved through the years. It contains relevant information and is up to date.

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 tone and balance of the article are neutral and unbiased. The authors did not try to sway readers one way or the other. All of the viewpoints are represented equally and supported by facts.

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 of the facts in the article are backed up by reliable and current sources. I checked three different links and they all work and redirect me to real pages.

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 well-written and easy to follow. There are a couple grammatical errors; however, it does not take away from my reading experience. It is well organized and major topics are broken down into easier-to-digest subcategories.

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 article does not contain any images, really. There are two on the side but they do not add any depth to the article. They are not captioned, either.

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 was some talk on how to improve the lead - the corrections were made and the user approved of the new changes.

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
I feel as if the status of the article is good. The strengths include going into depth on Intersectionality and incorporating many ideas that contribute to it. The article can be improved with the addition of compelling images. Overall, the article is well0developed and provided me with reliable information regarding the topic.

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: