User:JakeBrooks2/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: Roundnet
 * I chose this article because I played spike ball a lot over the summer and there are some clear flaws with the article

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? Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? The game was just made popular a couple years ago so yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is content missing in the "rules" and "skills" portion due to a lack of references and bias.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No to both

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes the part that "only appeals to a certain audience" has been removed
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Yes but it was removed from the article
 * 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

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No, a section labeled modified rules has no secondary source
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The sources used a thorough
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The game was just brought back to life do there isn't too much variation among the articles
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes it is easy to read
 * 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, it is broken down into many different topics making it easier to find what you need

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes it shows pictures of what the game looks like and even adds one of where to line up while playing
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? They talk about mixing up the generic game of roundnet and spikeball
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It has not received a rating and it is a part of a volleyball wiki project
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It is mostly the same

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It still needs some work but it overall gets the point across on how the game is played and some history into it.
 * What are the article's strengths? It has a good amount of sources for a game that was just recently revamped.
 * How can the article be improved? They need to fill in some of the sections as they were left blank due to not finding sources.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is not yet complete and is underdeveloped as of right now

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: