User:Jessiehorrorx/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: Afterlife
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because it is a topic that I am interested in and know quite a bit about.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, it does.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It doesn't directly state the major sections, but they are implied.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * It includes information that shows up throughout the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is overly detailed.

Lead evaluation
Overall, the lead is good. It provides very good information however it is too long. Some of the information in the lead should be placed in sections of the article itself.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * I believe it is up-to-date because after checking the references, I see some that have been added to within the last 2 years.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I feel that all the information provided should be there. I do not think that there is much, or any information missing.

Content evaluation
Overall, the content within the article is very up-to-date and accurate. There are many citations and references that lead to good sources. The content covers a wide range of topics within the topic of spirituality itself which I think leads to better content.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, I believe the article has a very neutral tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * From my reading, I do not see any positions that were biased one way or another.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I do not think any viewpoints are overrepresented or underrepresented. Every section has a good amount of information and the article does not focus on one thing the entire time.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, the article is very information and education based.

Tone and balance evaluation
Overall, the tone and balance of this article is excellent. It is a very neutral article that is not swayed one way or another. I personally know a lot about spirituality and the afterlife and the information is presented in a way that is meant to educate.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Not all of the facts are backed up. There are sections that say more citations and references are needed.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * After looking through several of the sources, it appears that each source has a good amount of information. Many of the sources were primary sources about the actual religion and gives more insight on the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Many of the sources are older - from the 1980s/1990s. However there are quite a few more recent sources from the 2000s and even later in the 2010s.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links do work.

Sources and references evaluation
Overall, the sources and references are good. They provide good information and the links work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * In my opinion, the article is very easy to read and gets straight to the point.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * From my reading, the article has minimal to no grammatical/spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is very well-organized. The categories and subcategories are represented in a very organized manner and makes looking through and reading much easier.

Organization evaluation
Overall, the organization of this article is excellent. It is very easy to read. The article has many categories and subcategories which allows readers to find exactly what they are looking for quickly.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There are only three images that appear in the article but I do believe they help capture the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The images are well-captioned. They are clear and tell exactly what is going on in the image.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I believe they do adhere to the copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * I do not think they are laid out in a visually appealing way because they are thrown in on the sides next to a block of text.

Images and media evaluation
Overall, the images and media could be better. There are very few images and while they are concurrent with the topic, they don't make much sense within the text itself.

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 behind this topic because it is very controversial. Many people do believe in an afterlife while others don't and that has sparked some debate.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This is a C-Class rated article.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * In class, we typically talk to each other and bounce off of one another's ideas. On this talk page, it seems everyone is doing their own thing and not really conversing with the other people.

Talk page evaluation
Overall, I'm not surprised that the talk page has the content it does on there. Many of the people on the talk page are talking about the sources than the actual content and trying their best to update it with reliable sources and information.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is a C-Class article.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The strengths of the article are the way it was organized, the content within the article, and the tone and balance of the article.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be improved with either more or less pictures, better sources in some cases, and more citations and references.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I believe the article is well-developed in the sense that all the information is there. The only thing that appears to be left to do is adding in the extra citations and references where they are needed.

Overall evaluation
Overall, I really enjoyed this article. The topic is something I am very interested in and it is nice to read about different religions and how they perceive the same idea. The article itself is very well-developed and just needs a few changes here and there to be fully complete.

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: