User:Helen.connolly/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: (link)Collaborative pedagogy
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This aligns with my research interests and teaching.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Somewhat - it provides some history and locates the topic among other related topics.
 * 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? no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think it could be edited to be a little clearer and more concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? mostly. Most of the references seem to come from a single (albeit reputable) source, so this could probably be improved upon.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I think that more information could be added.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The article appears fairly 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


 * 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? further reading section sources are mostly from the 80s; sources for the main component are from the last ten years
 * Check a few links. Do they work? None of the sources has a hyperlink.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? There are some grammatical and organizational things that could likely be improved upon.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? yes a few.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? I think that these could be addressed (more may be needed).

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are no images.
 * 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


 * 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 article has been flagged for cleanup. Most edits appear to have been made in 2013, although the latest is from March 2019.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? flagged for multiple issues: requires cleanup and written like a personal/argumentative essay
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved? I think more sources and a greater variety of sources will help. Providing examples may also make the content clearer.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It seems underdeveloped.

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: