User:Jasmarie1215/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: Music-related memory
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.: I have chosen to evaluate this article because at first glance it looks like a well put together article about a very interesting topic.

Lead

 * 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?

==== Lead evaluation: The Lead of this article clearly states what the article will be about. It gives a brief definition of what Music Memory is and the difference between what it is and what it could be commonly confused with. The initial paragraph unfortunately doesn't describe the major sections of the article. The lead is very short and as informative as it should be, it leaves the reader to guess what they article may be about if they don't look at the content section of the article. ====

Content

 * 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?

==== Content evaluation: The content list is relevant to the topic and different levels to what Musical Memory is and the research behind it. The content is up to date in that no new content has been added to the article. The last time the article was updated was July of this year. This article actually has a lot of subsections that I feel like could've been grouped together or not added at all, it was a little excessive. ====

Tone and Balance

 * 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?

==== Tone and balance evaluation: This article is neutral with the information provided on the topic. There is not sense of bias in each of the sub topics. There are some parts of the content that are scarce, like the Amusia section which has to do with tone deafness. There is no persuasion in the article either. The article does a really good job of just simply giving the information related to the topic. Some of the content just needs to be flushed out more. ====

Sources and References

 * 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?

==== Sources and references evaluation: The facts in the article are backed by reliable sources such as medical journals and medical essays. The sources aren't very current, some of them are over a decade old. The links connected to the article do work. Most of the authors are in the medical field which is understandable because this is an article about a Neurological condition so most of the research would have to be medically based. ====

Organization

 * 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

 * 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

 * 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?

==== Talk page evaluation: This article is apart of Wikiproject Psychology which means they're trying to improve the coverage of Psychology on wikipedia. This is a B class article. There have been talks about merging certain topics which is something that I mentioned earlier that could be beneficial to overall flow and look of the article. ====

Overall impressions

 * 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?

==== Overall evaluation: Overall it is a decent article, I think images and the merging of different topics could truly aid in the flow of the article. The fact that it was divided into clear section based on relevance of each topic was great. The Lead of the article really needs to be flushed a lot more, it needs to include what the article will be about not just definitions. ====

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: Talk:Music-related memory