User:Jademg12/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

 * Name of article: Secure attachment
 * I chose to evaluate this article because one of my favorite classes that I have taken was Attachment Relationships. I learned about all the different attachment relationships and was able to find my own. I specially chose to focus on secure attachment because I wanted to learn more about it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

- The lead does include an introductory sentence which gives the reader a definition of what secure attachment is. The lead also discuses attachment theory and briefly describes the three other attachment styles so the reader can see how secure attachment is different from the rest. The three other attachment styles are not present in the rest of the article.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

- The articles content is relevant to the topic. It talks about all the characteristics that are associated with those who are classify as having a secure attachment as well what a secure child looked like in the experiment, Strange Situation. Content is up to date, with the most recent source being from 2017.


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

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

- The article is neutral. It is not heavily biased toward anything mentioned. In fact, it acknowledges the critiques the attachment theory has and the nature versus nurture debate within secure attachment.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

- All facts in the article are backed up by reliable sources. These sources listed in the references section all had working links as well. Five sources are about there and six years old while the other sources used are over ten years old.


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

Organization

 * Guiding questions

- The article was well written and organized in a way that was easy to read. It gave back ground history in order for the reader to understand what attachment theory was then lead into the specifics of secure attachment. The sections included in this article are also relevant to the topic.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

- The article provides one image to show what secure attachment between a child and their primary care giver may look like. I think having this one image is fine because the article is very straight forward. Because it is so straight forward, I feel like the reader will be able to understand the article without needing to reference pictures.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

- The article is rated as a C and Low, meaning that it provides substantial information about a topic that covers a highly specific area of knowledge. The rating also means that the article is missing important points related to the topic. It is suggested that the article goes into more depth and touches on more topics such as the criticisms of secure attachment and examples cases.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

- The article is straight to the point and briefly introduces the reader to topics such as attachment theory and secure attachment. The article can be improved by talking more about secure attachment other than just the characteristics. It can address the critiques of it, what secure attachment looks like in certain situations, and etc. The strengths of this article is being able to introduce the topic in a way that is easy to understand for those who may have never heard of it. Overall, I think the article is good for someone who is just being introduced to the topic but I do think it can include more topics than it did.


 * 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?

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: