User:Hwasnak/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Water fluoridation

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

Because it is a non-controversial topic we discussed in class.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

Lead section:


 * 1) Does the lead section include a concise and clear introductory sentence?

Yes. It outlines what water fluoridation is and why it exists.

2. Does the lead include a brief description of the major sections?

Yes. The important points are made clear.

3. Does the lead include information that is not in the article?

No.

4. Is it concise or overly-detailed?

A bit overly-detailed, but there is a lot of important information.

Content:


 * 1) Is the content relevant?

Yes.

2. Is it up to date?

Yes. There were edits made this week.

3. Is there content that is missing or out of place?

No.

4. Does it deal with equity gaps or underrepresented populations?

Not directly.

Tone & Balance:


 * 1) Is there a neutral point of view? Yes.
 * 2) Is the article or any information biased? Not from what I can tell.
 * 3) Are there overrepresented or underrepresented views? No.
 * 4) Are fringe viewpoints described as such? Yes. See controversy section.
 * 5) Does the article attempt to persuade? No.

Sources & References:


 * 1) Are all facts backed by reliable sources? Yes.
 * 2) Are the sources thorough? Yes.
 * 3) Are the sources current? Mostly but there are some old sources.
 * 4) Are the authors of sources diverse? From what I can tell yes, but there are many sources.
 * 5) Are there better sources available? Not to my knowledge considering they use a wide range.
 * 6) Do the links work? Yes.

Organization & writing quality:


 * 1) Is it well-written? Yes.
 * 2) Does it have grammar or spelling errors? No.
 * 3) Is it well organized? Yes.

Images & Media:


 * 1) Does the article include relevant images? Yes.
 * 2) Are they well-captioned? Yes.
 * 3) Do they follow copyright restrictions? Yes from what I can tell.
 * 4) Are they laid out in an appealing way? Yes.

Talk Page:


 * 1) What kind of conversations are there? Mostly removal reasoning and edit suggestions.
 * 2) How is the article rated? It is a featured article.
 * 3) How do discussions differ from class? There is very little discussion regarding the actual content.

Overall impressions:


 * 1) What is the article's status? It is well-made and thorough
 * 2) What are the article's strengths? It covers many aspects of the topic and clarifies the most relevant information.
 * 3) What improvements could be made? It could be made a little less dense to be easier to read.
 * 4) How complete is the article? It seems complete.

Hwasnak (talk) 23:30, 11 September 2021 (UTC)