User:Hauen1jk/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: Cameroon
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose this article because it is the country in which the culture/peoples/art I'm studying resides in!

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? For the most part - there are many sub sections and most of them are touched on in some way.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Given the amount of sub sections, it is pretty concise.

Lead evaluation
The lead overall is pretty linear time-wise, stating history up to modern times and stating bits of relevant information associated with date changes. It sets up the rest of the page well. Lots of links and good info on the right side 'bar'.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Very much so!
 * Is the content up-to-date? Most 'Note' sources are from the past 10 years, but the 'References' seem a bit outdated: From 1999-2004.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I don't believe so.

Content evaluation
The content is VERY thorough, with lots of images, graphs and a well-rounded page.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? I don't think so.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Tone and balance evaluation
There did not appear to be extremes, too much focus on one thing or a specific bias/agenda. Very balanced, though there were a lot of points touched on and details.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Not all paragraphs had a footnote at the top, so I'm not positive if those were cited correctly.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? For the most part.
 * Are the sources current? Mostly, some references are outdated.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Sources and references evaluation
I am still a bit confused on sources and pinpointing where they're from/how to properly look at and evaluate them.. Sources seem alright, I'm not very confident.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? There were a lot of subheadings which could get a bit overwhelming, but they were also really detailed and about as concise as they could be.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Organization evaluation
For all the information added, the organization is great.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes!
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, brief and to the point
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I believe so (Don't remember how to double check..)
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Some are a bit squished together but overall, yes!

Images and media evaluation
Really informative, full images (and lots of them!) that build on points made.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Many Wikipedians touched on modifying external links as well as updating the coat of arms, and fixing formatting.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Was a featured article in 2007, rated one of the best articles produced by the community! A 'Level 4 Vital Article', part of WikiProjects Africa
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Wikipedians are very respectful, open, inviting edits/feedback and professional.

Talk page evaluation
There has definitely been some good critical eyes over this article! Looks to be pretty thoroughly picked apart.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? This is a very well done article and it is apparent by the community following it and all the information shown and organized well that it is a solid article. It's ratings are good, status overall is high.
 * What are the article's strengths? Very thorough, informative and diverse with all the knowledge: I feel like I could learn everything I'd need to know on this page about Cameroon!
 * How can the article be improved? Maybe some organization in the top could match the order of the way the subcategories are presented? The pictures and other graphs could be spaced out more, too.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Well-developed! Well done!

Overall evaluation
I was very impressed with this article and feel that it has set me up to understand the country of the people/art I will be studying well.

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: