User:Heinev1/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: Ancient Roman cuisine
 * I chose to evaluate this article because it is interesting to me and because it is classified as a start-class article, which means there is lots to be done to it.

Lead

 * 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

 * The lead does include an introductory sentence, but it does not clearly describe the article's topics. It is more of a hook-type sentence that is attempting to draw the reader in, and not descriptive of what the article includes.
 * The lead does not include a description of the article's major sections.
 * The lead includes information that is not explicitly in the article but it does not necessarily include information that is not present in the article. However, it does need to be updated.
 * The lead is concise, but it does not include the information that it should.

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

 * Yes, the content is relevant to the topic.
 * The content appears to be up-to-date, as it is a historical topic that has not changed much recently.
 * There is no content that is blatantly missing, and nothing that does not belong.

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

 * The article is neutral.
 * There are no claims that appear to be biased.
 * There do not seem to be over- or underrepresented viewpoints.
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader.

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?

Sources and references evaluation

 * Some of the facts in the article lack citation, this needs to be worked on.
 * The sources that are used seem to reflect a wide variety of literature. It includes books, journals, and other sources from a variety of authors.
 * The sources are mainly from the past 20 years. From a historical topic such as this, I would argue that they are current.
 * The links do 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

 * The article is easy to read, but as mentioned, the lead does not match the rest of the article. It is the least-well written part of the article.
 * The article did not have any noticeable grammatical or spelling errors.
 * The article is well-organized as far as the breakdown of the sections, but I would recommend that a few of the sections should be rearranged.

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

 * Yes, the article includes images that enhance the understanding of the topic.
 * The images are well-captioned, for the most part.
 * The images seem to adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. They are images from a very long time ago which indicates that are now public domain.
 * The layout of the images could be improved. Some are too small to make out the details, as well as they are generally similar sizes, they would be more visually appealing if the sizes varied.

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

 * The conversation in the talk page is respectful, but a lot of the claims being made are along the lines of "I thought this was the case, but I cannot find anything about it online"; they lack sources when making claims such as this one on the talk page.
 * The article is rated as start-class, and is within the WikiProject of food and drink and Classical Greece and Rome.
 * We have not really discussed this topic in class yet, but Wikipedia is very matter-of-fact when discussing the topic, which is similar to how we discuss things in class.

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 overall status of the article is start-class but of medium importance.
 * The article has a solid foundation, it does not try to make an argument but rather presents the facts
 * It can be improved by citing the facts better, and expanding on some of the facts that are presented. The images also need to be improved.
 * The article is about 50% complete. I would say it is slightly underdeveloped but is not 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: