User:Fir Gotten/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: Red Algae
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

It looked interesting, a I love ocean life.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The introductory sentence has a lot of information about the scientific name of the plant, but of what it is.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead does include a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Well yes, but actually no? It's very long and I really only looked at the first paragraph.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is VERY overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? The articles content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The content appears to be up to date, though it does say in the lead that information is constantly expanding.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The article and talk page are large enough for me to assume everything belongs.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? As a scientific article, everything is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, because it is a scientific article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Every section is equal to the next.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, because it is a scientific article.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? There are so many sources I assume so.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I believe so, there's a lot of them.
 * Are the sources current? The oldest source (that I saw) was from 1988, and the newest (from what I saw) is from 2017, so it's really a mixed bag.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The few links I checked worked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is easy to read if you know a lot about biology, but not for the average shmoo.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? It does not.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The article is mostly well organized, the lead needs work.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? The article has a gallery in it.
 * Are images well-captioned? The image captions are just of the specific types.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I have no clue
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? The images are laid out appealingly.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Half the conversations are on the image, the other half are on scientific classifications.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? WikiProject Tree of Life	(Rated C-class, High-importance) WikiProject Algae	(Rated C-class, Top-importance)
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? In class, we don't talk about Red Algae, or scientific articles.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? C
 * What are the article's strengths? Have a lot of information.
 * How can the article be improved? Lead is incredibly long, could be made into its own section.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is 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: