User:Jas1075/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
Open the "Articles" tab on our class WikiEd project and pick one of the "Available Articles" or "Assigned Articles" to read and evaluate. As you read, answer the following questions (but don't feel limited to these):


 * 1) First, identify which article you read. Then answer the Evaluating content questions: Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Is there anything that you think should be added to the topic?
 * 2) *The article I read was one titled Idiolect. Everything included in the article is relevant to the topic. I thought that there could be more information included about the usage in vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation. It also could have benefitted from some more examples related to the topic beyond just the ones included in the forensic linguistics section.
 * 3) Evaluating tone: Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * 4) *The article is neutral. There are no parts of it that seem biased at all towards a position.
 * 5) Evaluating sources: Check a few citations. Do the links work? Is there any close paraphrasing or plagiarism in the article? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * 6) *Only a few of the citations include links but the ones that do include a link work. The English sources support the claims in the article. There is no plagiarism that I could spot in the article, the points are all sourced.
 * 7) Evaluating sources (continued): Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * 8) *Each fact includes an appropriate reference though one of the sourced facts is noted to need a better source. The information comes from a variety of articles and journals that for the most part are neutral. One of the sources is sort of humorous in its writing but does not seem biased.
 * 9) Checking the talk page: What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * 10) *There is some conversation in the talk page but most are just single comments without any replies. The talk is related to how to improve the article and represent the topic. Conversations of note include ones criticizing an example that is no longer included in the article.

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: (link)
 * Idiolect (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I do not hear this term used very often and I was interested in learning more.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the introductory sentence concisely describes the article's topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, there is no mention of the article's major sections in the lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, the lead mentions unique usage in vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation but does not really delve into those topics in the rest of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, all the content included is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Relatively so, the sources are not that old and there have been edits as recent as January 2020
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There could be more content included but there is no content that does not belong.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


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

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Most of them seem reliable though the page indicates one of them could be a stronger source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, they reflect relevant writings.
 * Are the sources current?
 * They are many from within the last 30 years but not many from the last 10 years.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links used do work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, it is very conside and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not any that I could spot.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * There are two sections that represent the major points and split up the included information well.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

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 are some conversations but not many replies to each other. There is talk of how to improve the article though.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated Start-Class and Mid-importance and it is part of WikiProjects Linguistics.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't really talked about this topic in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is an overall decent article.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is very concise and easy to follow.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * There is not a whole lot of information on the topic and there could be more recent sources included.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is well-developed but brief.

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: