User:Ilouiswilliams1/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: (Tight end)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Because I have a strong interest in American football and I want to make sure that if people are reading about the positions on Wikipedia, that they're not getting the wrong information.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * No

Lead evaluation
The lead sets up a great introduction to the position article. The lead showcases some false information at the end, where it states "Offensive formations may have as few as zero or as many as three tight ends at one time." You are unable to have three tight ends at one time

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Somewhat.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes and yes

Content evaluation
The content is clear, up to date, and relevant to the topic of the article

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

Tone and balance evaluation
There doesn't seem to be any bias in the article, just straight facts

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Somewhat
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
The sources come from many different authors and are up to date with the topic of the article

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Yes
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes

Organization evaluation
The article is organized into the different parts of the position and clearly showcase every part and job of the position

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * No
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes

Images and media evaluation
The images in the article are clear, well captioned, and help the reader understand the position better

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The conversations about the topic seems like there is editing needed and that some of the information isn't really accurate
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-class
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The page does need some editing, however it isn't horrible

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Good, but needs a little editing
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Gives good and accurate information, explains the position's purpose very clearly
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Being reviewed and not giving out false information
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I believe the article is very well developed, and clearly showcases the mechanics of the position

Overall evaluation
It is a very clear and well structured article, however it could definitely use some editing to make it more accurate

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: