User:Jbarnesatm/Evaluate an Article

User: Jbarnesatm/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: Cognitive science
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Relates to what we are studying and has been listed as a C-class article.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes but the sentences after are cluttered and appear to have not undergone an revisions or edits before being published.
 * 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 but the articles that do contain the information are cited.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I would say that the lead is overly detailed. some aspects of the lead could be put into a section dedicated to the beginnings of cognitive science.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, but again the content is cluttered and not easy for individuals with little understanding of the subject to read.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The talk page shows that the last edits were done in 2018 but nothing sense then has been done to improve the quality of the article. the research and citations are up to date showing relatively recent peer reviewed articles from 2017 on the subject matters at hand.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes to both. There is little detail on important subjects and to much detail on subjects that are unnecessary to the article itself.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * There are many statements that are not backed by research. this article is definitely lacking when it comes to references.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * I would say they do not because again there is very few sources for the topic at hand.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most of the sources found where up to date or at least relevant to the subject at hand.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links I checked do work and where inserted correctly.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is not well write and would be very difficult for someone unfamiliar with the topic to understand. It is not concise with all aspects of the topic and gives greater attention to certain areas of the article.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Yes.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * No there are many items and topics that would be better served to be placed in different areas of the article or done away with all together.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

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 many conversations about information that is either duplicated or unnecessary all together. The most recent conversation was a vote to determine the definition of cognitive science.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as a C-Class article. and is a part of WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * They talk more about the studies and science behind the topic but do not really dive into the overall theories and principles of the subject.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I would say the article resembles that of a first draft with good references but still in need of more.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The information collected is strong there is just not enough of it.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More references that are more current. Reorganization of the principles of the topic of the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped

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:Cognitive science