User:Harshil.thakur/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: Flowchart (Flowchart)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I like the topics of algorithms and the way they function and I thought that reading about how to plan algorithms out with the help of Flowcharts could be useful and fun to read about.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The article "Flowchart" describes the history and types of flowcharts and the softwares it can be used for. It first explains what flowcharts are and what they are basically comprised of. The article goes over how flowcharts have been used for creating algorithms and in what types of compartments are the information stored. It also contains many examples and links to related articles to further enhance your reading experience and help you to understand the topic better.


 * 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

Yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic which is Flowcharts. It contains all the information that you need to know. Yes, it looks up to date as the last edit was a few days ago- on October 17. Some information has been added while other information that was not useful or too confusing was deleted. I think that they can add one more programming language for the "diagramming" section underneath the "Softwares" tab - Scratch. I don't see any equity gaps in the article I selected. The things that were important were emphasized and written more in detail and the information that may not be useful to the article has been either deleted or briefly described.


 * 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

Yes, the article is neutral throughout. No, there are no claims that appear heavily biased. The topic is about flowcharts so I don't think it can get biased. But the article, even in places where there was a potential for bias (for example in the history portion), made sure that it stayed neutral and give everyone who had a contribution in the development of flowcharts equal representation in it. I feel that they could have elaborated the "Parallel Processing" portion of the article a little more. No, it doesn't persuade the reader into any position. It is just a straight-forward article about the history and the types of flowcharts and their applications.


 * 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

Yes, all facts are backed up by reliable resources. Yes, they all expand upon the ideas touched upon in the article and give further information about them. Some sources like books are from 2009 or 2010 but most of the websites used were either educational or private but from reliable companies or organizations. They also referred to several college presses as well such as Princeton or MIT which are highly reliable. Yes, the sources written are either websites from companies that were in existence since the early stages of the internet to software companies that have recently been formed. The sources also include authors such as professors releasing books from their respective schools which are highly reputable such as MIT or Princeton. All the links that I checked worked.


 * 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

Yes, the article is easy to read and concise. Its structure is very clear and organized. I don't think that there are any grammatical or spelling error in the article.Yes, it covers all major points that I thought it should cover and is very well written, in my opinion. The only thing will be to expand the Parallel Processing portion of it a little more which I already stated in an earlier question. The rest looks well-written.


 * 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

Yes, when it comes to showing images, I feel that the article does a good job showing us. They showed pictorial representation of all the different symbols used in Flowcharts and also told us what they meant. They did it in the form of a table. All of the images except for the last image with the "Flowgorithm" captioning in it, have good captioning. The way they could have made that captioning better is by expanding upon what flowgorithm is or just say which software he/she is using and what it is trying to display. Yes, all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. Not really, but again the website and the article is very simple. I don't like the way how Wikipedia, in general, does not have an appealing way of showing information. It is very simple and not very fun to look at. But the pictures are clear to look at and are good in representing what is written in a visual form.


 * 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

People are having conversations about what to change and what to keep and delete. Yes, there are conversations where they are talking about how they should word a sentence differently just because if there are any beginners reading, they will get confused. There are also discussion going on about how a heading for a topic appeared too personal and so how they should reword it. The article is rated as Level 5 and is a "vital article in technology". Yes, "it is of interest to" the WikiProject Computing and WikiProject Systems. We discuss topics very casually in class but in Wikipedia, I see a lot of professionalism in the style of writing. But it takes a long time for people to reply back while in class there is an ostentatious discussion. You don't need to wait to hear back.


 * 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

I feel that the article is a well-written and organized article which is easy to read. It is rated well as it is given a Level 5 vital article in technology on the top of the talk page. Its strengths are that it explains every important point that I feel it should explain and it explains it concisely and effectively. They also give pictorial representations of all the symbols that are used in a Flowchart and describe what they mean and what they are used for. There are a few areas where I feel that they are missing information or should expand a little more such as "Parallel Processing" and "Diagraming" under "Software". I feel that the article is well-developed and through about the topic and all the details it has to give about Flowcharts.


 * 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: