User:Jaylinemiranda/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: (Technology education)
 * I chose this article because I am an Education major and technology has become an important part of people's everyday lives in the 21st century. I wanted to read more about how technology education is being implemented in society.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the article defines what technology education and connects how it relates to education.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Under the contents, yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise and to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes includes the history of the project and how it is being used today.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Last edit was made over 2 months ago.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Not to my knowledge.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, very neutral. It is an informative article, no bias or opinions.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * 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?
 * Yes, every other sentence follows a citation.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most sources are current, from a year or two ago.
 * 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 the article is concise and clear. Only talks about two important topics. Its history and how relevant it is to today. Easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I noticed while reading.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Very well-well-organzied.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

This article does not include images.


 * 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?
 * Someone expressed that they believed this was a weak article back in 2015. However, it has been throughly discussed and improved since then.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * I don't see in the top right corner that it has been related at all.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

I think overall this is a very good article considering that it is a fairly new topic that will be changing as technology advances. The strengths are the source of its history and the its connections to its current status. So far, well developed.


 * 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: