User:Honeybee64/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.


 * Eleanor Roosevelt
 * I chose this article to evaluate because she is a well known public figure that has a lot of information known about her. I feel because of this that she would have a well done article that would allow me to see what a quality article looks like.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * I believe that the introductory sentence is clear and concise but I feel could use more information to describe the articles topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The article did include a brief description of most of the articles major sections, it was missing some of the sections at the end that maybe weren't as important to include in the lead such as published books and different recognitions.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No the lead does not include information that is not present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I feel that the Lead has just enough detail.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Most of the topics content is relevant to the topic. There are some sections that talk about her husband only that don't really have anything to do with Eleanor's life.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes the content is up-to-date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think talking about her husband's career belongs.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Most of the article I would say is neutral and uses neutral language
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * The section regarding anti-Semitism was worded weird and seemed a little biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No there are no viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No the article does not attempt to persuade the reader in one position or another.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, there is many secondary sources that seem reliable.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, there is an extensive bibliography of reliable secondary sources.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Not as much but it is old information and not much new information has come out on the subject since.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes they work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It's a little wordy and might be hard for lesser educated people to read like younger children. But overall I think that it is well written.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, there are multiple sections and subsections.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, there are many images. At least one image per section.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * They say the people in the picture and where they are located as well as the date which is good. I feel like adding the context of the picture would have been beneficial.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Kind of. I don't particularly like how some of them are stacked but it might just be the way you can layout pictures on Wikipedia.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Most of the comments are about tidying up, fixing grammatical errors and there are a few about fixing misinformation.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a good article status. And it is part of several WikiProjects including Biography/Politics and Government, Human Rights, International Relations, LGBT studies, Hudson Valley, Women's History, Journalism, and Politics/America.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not discussed this topic in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is a good status article
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It does a good job with the way that it words things and changing it from the way the sources stated things.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think that there was some personal information that may not need to be included and that was too personal (her sex life) but then again the information is available then maybe it should be included.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is well-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: