User:Humphreyselynn/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: Dogrib language
 * I chose this article to evaluate because I'll be editing it and i need to know what is lacking and what isn't before I edit 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 seems fine, It introduces the language and although it doesn't describe each of the sections, that is near impossible for phonetics, it gives a good overview of what is contained in the article.It, however, does include information that should be and is not in consequent sections as well as doesn't have citations where it should. It is concise and nicely worded though.

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
the content is relevant to the topic but it is missing a lot of information on geographical location, grammar, and general history of the language; it is also completely lacking in any information regarding its revitalization. The number of speakers is also according to the 2016 census so the information is old, but there is not much new information on that.

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 tone is all good, there does not seem to be any basis or attempts to persuade the reader. However, because information is lacking it is possible that the information is one sided.

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
The sources are greatly lacking and some claims do not appear to have any sources footnoted, like the "geographic distribution" section. Most of the sources are within the last decade, however there is a repeated source. Most of the links work although some lead to confusing sites that are difficult to navigate.

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
Of all the information that is included it is impeccably organized.

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 but the article is also insanely short so this is adequate. This image is placed well and enhances the topic. it is not the most appealing image but it gets the job done.

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 talk page's most recent update is that I am now working on the article. it is part of three different projects, in all of which it is represented as start-class and it is of high importance to WikiProject Arctic which is "believed to be inactive". There is not much going on on the talk page at all.

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 definitely needs a lot of help, it definitely needs a section on revitalization efforts and its other sections should be expanded, more sources need to be updated and the sources need to be clearly credible. Its current information is well organized and will be easy to work with. The article is poorly developed but as it is difficult to find information on the topic it is at a good place for going forward.

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: