User:Its Castle/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: Polymer
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because I was lead here by a WikiProject and it sounded interesting but I don't have an in depth knowledge of it.

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? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Maybe a little overly detailed in the lead.

Lead evaluation
I would say that the lead is informative, but perhaps a little too detailed for the opening of the article. Some of the content (like terms and inventions of concepts) would probably fit better in the "History" section.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes
 * 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? I don't know for certain, but I do not think so.

Content evaluation
To the best of my knowledge, the content of the article is up to standards.

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
Since this an article about a material, there is not a lot of places for viewpoints. There seems to be no inappropriate tones or bias in the article.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No, there are several paragraphs with no citation.
 * 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
Although the sources sited seem varied and reliable, there are several sections of the article appearing to lack citation.

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? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Organization evaluation
The article seems well organized and grammatically correct.

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? Yes (as far as I can tell)
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Images and media evaluation
The images used throughout the article seem appropriate and informative.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There are a lot of conversations on the talk page. Mostly about how technical the information is and if the organization could be improved.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated as B-Class. It is part of a WikiProject under "Chemistry".
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It seems like most of the talk page is similar to the way it was described.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page seems about how I expected although most of it is older and it is hard to tell if the things discussed years ago have been fixed.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is full fledged, it is also semi-protected due to previous vandalism.
 * What are the article's strengths? Without an advanced knowledge of polymers, it seems very technically knowledgeable. There also seems to be a lot of varied sources being drawn from.
 * How can the article be improved? The large amounts of technical data up front may turn people away (which was discussed in the talk page) so having a simpler start to the article with some more advanced info in the sections may work better.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say the article seems mostly complete in the way of information is represented.

Overall evaluation
The article is well made and researched, however it is very heavy on the technical aspects. Some work may need to be done to make it more accessible to all.

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: