User:Jacqueline.Berntsen/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: (link) Arkansas Twister
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because I've ridden the Arkansas Twister and I wanted to know more about it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The lead has a good introductory sentence.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead describes all of the articles major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? The lead does not include any unnecessary information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? The articles content is relevant to the topic being discussed.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The content of this article is up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is not any content that does not belong in this piece. There is not any information on accidents for this ride or overall safety.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? This is a neutral article.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There is no biased language present in this article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There are no overrepresented or underrepresented viewpoints.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? The article is not persuading the reader in favor of any position.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes the facts in this article are all backed up.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? These are thorough sources.
 * Are the sources current? These are somewhat current sources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Almost all of the links work but one is connected to a paid site.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? This article is clear and concisely written.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? The article does not 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? This article is well organized because it is broken into a section for the history and one for the experience.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? The article displays a picture of the Arkansas Twister. However I think more should be added.
 * Are images well-captioned? This image is not well captioned. It currently says "taken by me" which does not depict the picture at all.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? The image was uploaded directly to Wikipedia so there is no copyright on it.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There is only one image at the beginning of the article, but it is brightly colored which makes it appealing.

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 is a conversation about adding more references to the article. There is also a conversation about someone removing an irrelevant sentence from the article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is rated in the B-class. This article is included in the WikiProject Amusement Parks and the WikiProject United states. It is also supported by WikiProject Arkansas.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The talk pages use Wiki code and we do not. All of the posts are straight to the point so there is no confusion about what is being discussed.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is short but it is well written. There is not any unnecessary content included and it gives a good description of the topic.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article has dates to back up the history and give a timeline of the topic. All of the information is backed up with sources.
 * How can the article be improved? One of the sources is from a paid site which is not within the guidelines of Wikipedia. There could also be safety information added to the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The work is well developed but there could be more safety information added.

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: