User:Hlandazuri/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: Huayco tinamou
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * This bird is found in the Andes and its name caught my attention as it is in Quechua. I noticed that there is some information on it, but it can definitely be expanded upon.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Kind of. The parenthetical describing the other ways of spelling its name distracts from the single sentence used to describe it.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, in a contents table.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? A little too concise, perhaps. Though there might not actually be much to lead with.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Not exactly, the latest updated reference is from 2012.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Not that I can tell.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * 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.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Seems like it.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The references seem pretty thorough, though I wonder if after 8 years since the last publication listed if there isn't any more reliable work that could be referenced or used to expand the topic.
 * Are the sources current? Not exactly. Most recent publication is 2012.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Not all of them do. The second reference listed brings up a "404 not found" error.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The parenthetical describing the other ways of spelling its name distracts from the single sentence used to describe it, otherwise it is clearly written and very brief.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I can tell.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? The only image offered is an illustration from 1895.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I believe so.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There are a lot of updates to the conservation status, but no actual conversations on the subject.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as Low-Importance and a Stub-class on the WikiProject Birds.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There is no conversation around it, which is completely opposite of some of the articles we saw in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Stub-class, low-importance
 * What are the article's strengths? Very factual.
 * How can the article be improved? I think it should be updated with actual photos of the bird and perhaps more on its habitat range, migration, behavior and other important details.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is underdeveloped, could use more up to date research.

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: