User:JJayala4/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: Bowling
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Why not? There was nothing that would lead an individual to pick any certain page and this seemed perfectly random

Lead

 * Guiding questions

Yes, it concisely addressed bowling as it is known around the world.

No, no mention of the major sections is made before the article dives into them

Yes, the widespread appreciation and participation for bowling is only mentioned at the end of the introduction

It is a bit overly detailed for an introduction, discussing oils and patters that could clearly be put in a later section.


 * 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
Overall okay, I would suggest taking out some of the superfluous information which detracts from the clarity of the "Bowling" description

Content

 * Guiding questions

Yes, all the content so far as i can see is about bowling

There is some discussion in the talk page about new technologies in bowling that are not yet included but I myself do not know how recent these are. from what ican tell the article is up to date.

There is a great deal of content, i see nothing missing or incorrect


 * 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
I would say the content is better than the introduction, very detailed and in depth

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

Yes the article is neutral

No major claims outside of facts about bowling

Not really any viewpoints at all

No persuasion in this article


 * 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
Perfect score in my book

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Yes, there are many many references from quite reputable sources

I would not know to be totally honest but they seem like they are

Yes the sources are current

Looking at a dozen links they were all functioning and relevant


 * 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
sources look great

Organization

 * Guiding questions

It is decently well written, clear and easy to understand language throughout the article.

The article contains no grammar errors nor unnecessary language.

The organization of the History section is a bit off, very elongated with limited structure


 * 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
Could use improvement in the organization of History but well written apart from that

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

yes there are images everywhere that a new item or topic is introduced

the images are all well captions

Yes! the images are compliant

Yes, there is a consistent form of placement for the pictures in the article throughout the different sections


 * 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
Images look solid, captions and copyrights all in check

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

Certain conversation about what could be added to the page regarding new resins for example were taking place.

the article is rate C-Class and is a part of two projects: WikiProject Sports and WikiProject Bowling

It was my understanding that this was strictly a Wikipedia exercise, not related to the topics of microfluidics. oops.


 * 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
Talk page is somewhat active and informative

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall status of the article is that it may need some improvements. A more logical approach to the History section would help and some cleaning up and re-organizing information could make certain sections more clear. The article does a good job of briefly describing certain component of the sport and connecting them with images and links to their full pages on Wikipedia (when they exist). In terms of completeness it appears it is a relatively developed article with substantial information.


 * 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 evaluation given by Wikipedia is well-stated: C-Class

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: