User:Istone2vu/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.


 * 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?

Yes, describes each aspect of the issue and where the article will go.


 * Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)

No


 * Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Should be more concise. I think it gets into too many details too quickly without organization of the article.

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

Yes.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

Yes, the timeline includes information/dates from July of 2021.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

no


 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

no

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.


 * Is the article from a neutral point of view?

Yes


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

no


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

No, objective


 * Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?

No minority/fringe viewpoints, only explained the occurrences


 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

No, there are no sides/positions.

Sources and References

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

Yes, significant sourcing and citing


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

Yes, significant sourcing and citing


 * Are the sources current?

Yes, some are from 2021


 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

Yes, there are hundreds of citations and articles used as sources.


 * Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)

With over 500 sources, they had plenty of different media to use, but I found one article ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5353852/ ) which seemed to have good information not located on the source list.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Yes.

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.


 * 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?

no


 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Yes

Images and Media


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

Yes including protests and politicians


 * Are images well-captioned?

Yes they include info about who is in it/what they’re doing


 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

yes


 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Yes they are organized by relevant/related topics

Talk page discussion

The article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.


 * 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?

C-class and level 5 vital. It’s a part of multiple wikiprojects.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Gives more political information/background, how it has affected or will affect consumers

Overall impressions


 * What is the article's overall status?

Strong and informative, could be more concise


 * What are the article's strengths?

Significant/extensive research, objectivity, timeline


 * How can the article be improved?

More concise introduction, better organization of the major points in the beginning and throughout


 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Complete, well-developed, information if all there, should be more organized/concise.

Examples of good feedback

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Cwood1212 (talk) 18:17, 11 September 2021 (UTC)cwood1212

Which article are you evaluating?
Flint water crisis

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article to evaluate because of it's significance in understanding water contamination and it's effects.

~Istone2vu

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.)