User:Hdhall01/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: Joji (musician)
 * I enjoy Joji's music and have been a fan before he actively did music


 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
Yes it describes Joji very accurately and has an overall topic. Yes it does include a brief description of majors sections. No it doesn't include information that isn't in the article. It is somewhat overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
Most of the content is relevant and up-to-date, however Joji does not live in Brooklyn, NY anymore.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
Yes there is one very biased sentence that states Joji is a "one-time author" which seems somewhat derogatory. This was picked up on in the talk section as something to change

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
Yes it is well written and well organized. It has no grammatical errors

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
There is one image of Joji, however it was fan taken and not licensed. The talk section says that they should get a licensed picture instead. They should do this and also get a more recent picture.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
Conversations of small changes to the article. The article is rated C and it is apart of Comedy, Australia, Arts and Entertainment, and Internet Culture. The article is very vague about the controversy Joji's old "Filthy Frank" and "Pink Guy" videos brought about.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
The article is underdeveloped and could use more information. Joji is not only an up and coming popular artist, but he has a rich history on the internet; Youtube especially. The article can also have more links to Joji's past on youtube (ex. a link to HowToBasic, Maxmoefoe, and Anythingforviews).

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: