User:Gukutete/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: Sustainable sanitation
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Due to Covid-19, I often hear the word "sanitation", so I want to investigate more how and what we should to make sustainable sanitation.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, definitely!
 * 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? As far as I look over, no!!
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think it is concise and not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Definitely yes!!
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? I think so!!
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Maybe, they are balanced views.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I think everything sounds good to me.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, they are based on facts and do not try persuade us to take a certain position.

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

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it is well-written.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, perfect to me.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, definitely. It is well-flow.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, perfect.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Of course!

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? I would talk about how "Sustainable Sanitation" works and what processes should we take to get it.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? By learning wikipedia knowledge, I will be able to judge the article. And, It is a part of my WikiProject.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It is completely based on neutral facts.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Great to me because information is unbiased and really concise.
 * What are the article's strengths? The entire organization and it is based on neutral facts
 * How can the article be improved? "Comparison" section seems to be a little bit long to me, so authors should focus more on "Sustainable Sanitation" itself when they firstly explain this term.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? IT is well-developed and it enhanced my understanding of this 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: