User:Jaditol/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Beef noodle soup - Wikipedia
 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead section: Lead section: covers the basic information about beef noodle soup by providing plenty of external information that readers will be able to click on. It might be better if the information are listed explicitly to make readers easier to read. :Content: There are lots of room to improve with more detailed and engaging information, and some of them are not up-to-date.
 * Tone and balance: The tone is natural, but still can be improved.
 * Source and reference: More sources should be better to prove and make a more solid information page.
 * Organization and writing quality: The quality is fair and covers the basics.
 * The organization structure: simple and should be more well-organized.
 * Images and media: The pictures shown are fairly great quality and good amount, but could be improved by more attractive pictures.
 * Take page section: The talk page section has lots of information that can be collaborate to the main article section.
 * Over impression: The overall status is stub which has a fairly large space to improve, the length aren't that long for food and definitely has room to improve.


 * Sources
 * https://zhidao.baidu.com/question/122526869.html (Chinese wiki)
 * www.lanzhou.gov.cn/col/col15/index.html (government web)

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Henry M. Jackson High School - Wikipedia
 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead section: briefly talked about the history of the school, but also mentioning many other school names which might make readers confusing:Content: There are lots of room to improve with more detailed and engaging information, and some of them are not up-to-date.
 * Tone and balance: The tone is natural, but still can be improved with better word-choice.
 * Source and reference: More sources should be better to prove and make a more solid information page.
 * Organization and writing quality: The quality is fair and covers the basics.
 * The organization structure: simple and should be more well-organized.
 * Images and media: The pictures should be updated and more engaging.
 * Take page section: The talk page section has some engagement but it's not well organized.
 * Over impression: The overall status is stub which has a fairly large space to improve, maybe more stories will make it more interesting.


 * Sources

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Talk:Ichiran - Wikipedia


 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead section: okay, seems informational. :Content: only has a location section, might be a good idea to add more information about their noodles and dishes types.
 * Tone and balance: The tone is natural, but still can be improved with better word-choice.
 * Source and reference: More sources should be better to prove and make a more solid information page.
 * Organization and writing quality: The quality should be improve with more sections.
 * The organization structure: simple, not much content.
 * Images and media: The pictures are good.
 * Take page section: The talk page section has nothing.
 * Over impression: The overall status is stub which has a fairly large space to improve, maybe more stories about the founders and his awards.


 * Sources

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Fujiya - Wikipedia


 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead section: could be better, not too much description. :Content: only has two sections, might be a good idea to dive deeper into the more up-to-date contents.
 * Tone and balance: The tone is natural.
 * Source and reference: More sources should be better to prove and make a more solid information page.
 * Organization and writing quality: okay.
 * The organization structure: simple, not much content.
 * Images and media: The pictures are good, but out-of-date.
 * Take page section: Seems like conversations going on.
 * Over impression: The overall status is stub which has a fairly large space to improve, maybe more stories about the changes the company has made.


 * Sources
 * 不二家_百度百科 (baidu.com)
 * 不二家_百度百科 (baidu.com)

Option 5

 * Article title
 * XPeng - Wikipedia


 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead section: fair. :Content: good developed, but I see a gap in maybe elaborate more in its competitors.
 * Tone and balance: The tone is natural, good.
 * Source and reference: sufficient amount of sources.
 * Organization and writing quality: has room to improve.
 * The organization structure: well-organized..
 * Images and media: The pictures are good, but out-of-date.
 * Take page section: Nothing.
 * Over impression: The overall status is stub though it's relatively well developed, might be a challenging one to improve.


 * Sources
 * NIO (car company) - Wikipedia