User:JamieH7/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: Recruitment
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * We have chosen this article to evaluate because the recruitment process really interests our group and we want to know more about it. It is also one of the many topics we will discuss in our human resource class this semester.

Lead
The Lead has a very strong introductory sentence that is concise and clearly describes the topic of recruitment. It lists all the article’s major sections and does not present any irrelevant information. It is not overly detailed but rather straight to the point.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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
The article’s content is all relevant to recruitment. The content is all relatively up to date. However, the stats that are listed in the article are from 2013 which is starting to get a little old therefore, they will need to be updated with some more recent stats fairly soon. There does not seem to be any missing content in the article or content that does not belong in a recruitment article. The article does not deal with one of Wikipedia’s equity gaps and does not address any topics related to historically underrepresented populations.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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
The article seems to be neutral as it touches on various topics in the recruiting process without any form of bias. It stays neutral by defining the topics and going in depth on what those topics relate to without forming any opinions. This article main topic does not give the writer grounds to overrepresent or underrepresent as it is written in a way to help only readers understand its meaning and what it incorporates with facts from 2013.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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
The article has multiple facts and over 35 references with several links within to click on business terms (eg. screening and selection, purple squirrels, job boards, business ethics…). It appears they have posted one if not more references per paragraph on the article. The sources provided are current with references from 2017-2020. There are multiple different publications/authors, and further clicking on a couple links and references they check out. Although I would recommend possibly adding more information on the past knowledge or the evolution of recruitment, because it does not provide much historical information, it does provide the disadvantages and corruptions of recruitment. Therefore I would consider the article reliable but not overly informational.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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
This article seems to be well written with clear and concise grammar. It looks to be thoroughly well reviewed as there are no grammatical or spelling errors. It is properly broken down into different sections with sub headings that go on to further explain and help readers understand the main topic.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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
The article does not include any images or media to help enhance the understanding of recruitment. Adding pictures or diagrams would increase the article’s overall quality and possibly make it easier for people to grasp an idea of what recruitment can look like.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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
There are no available conversations about the article, the past 2 articles have been closed. The article has been listed as a level-5. From the only comment that can be seen, the wikipedian says the article could if possible be merged to another article as it does not provide tons of additional information, and recommended it be added to “Recruitment Strategies” page. However it was part of 2 wiki course assignments in 2019 and 2020. Wikipedia discusses the topic in a more generalized broad term whereas in class we have broken it down further discussing what builds recruitment.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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
The article overall status a “start” it is developing but still quite incomplete. The article does provide meaningful content that will help a reader understand the basics of what “recruitment” is all about. The article could improve in content by adding more related information with reliable sources. I would assess the articles’s completeness as an underdeveloped article, as there are multiple related topics that should be covered in the article which were not covered. This improvement will make the article much more comprehensive.
 * Guiding questions
 * 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: