User:Francell Ayala/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) Ableism
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose this article because recently I have been doing a lot of research on disabilities and how our society treats and views disable people.

Lead

 * Guiding question

The lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly describes the topic. It gives you the knowledge you need in order to understand the rest of the article because it is based on the meaning of that words. The Lead does not include information that is no present in the article, also it is concise because it is not overly detailed.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content in this article is relevant to the topic and it covers some of the history and some of the sub-topics of ableism. The last time this page was updated was on March 10,2020 but not all the information is up to date and there is some missing information about some topics they are short, and they could go more into detail. This article is about discrimination against the disable community, but it seems that it is done from a able-bodied pinto of view. It addresses the historical part of the word and the how underrepresented disable community is in the media and in general.


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

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

This article seems neutral at first but once you analyze it you notice that it is only from an able-body point of view. Most the information that is given it's how disable people are effected but no how they feel about it. Yes, this article is sharing information and knowledge so that people can stop the behavior and the discrimination.


 * 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?

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

Organization

 * Guiding questions

This article can be better written, and this would make it easier to understand. If the person knows basic information basic information about the subject is easy to understand but if it's a new subject it can be a little more difficult to understand it. I didn't see any grammatical or spelling errors also the article is well-organized in the sense that the topics are well organized and reflect the major points of topics.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

This article only includes two photos about the topic, and they don't enhance the understanding of this topic. One of the images has a brief description of what's happening in the photo and what it means but the other just tells you what you can see in the photo. For me the images are not laid out in a visually appealing way they are just pace there.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

In the talk page the main conversation is that this article has the potencial to be great but it is not there yet and that some parts of the article are perceived as been based in opinion and not on facts. This article has bee rated as C-class and it does not part of any WikiProjects. In class the discussion is more natural and not that professional but in wikipedia is formal and straight and they don't get distracted with another subject mid discussion.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

This article overall status is that it has a good base but still needs a lot of work to be encyclopedic material. One of the strengths of this article is that the information it has is not only from the United State of America, this makes so that more people can see it and have a bigger demographic group. This article can be improved by adding more information and maybe taking organizing it more. I will assess this article as an underdeveloped article but with a good starting base, it is good for basic knowledge of the topic.


 * 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?

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: