User:JorgiaQ/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: Paul Nation
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: A scholar who I might be interested in doing my assignment on.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? : The lead does give a description, but is not very clear and the information being presented is not well organized.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? : No, just a table of contents.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? : No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? : Overly detailed. Run on sentence make it less concise and harder to understand.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?: Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? : yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? : Discussion of Nation's key concepts lack detail in their description and they are not discussed at equal lengths.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? : No

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? : 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? : no
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? : no
 * Are the sources current? : No
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No
 * Check a few links. Do they work? : Not all

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? : No, Lots of run on sentences and grammatical errors.
 * 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, the research section needs to be broken down in to sub categories of key concepts/research.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?: No
 * Are images well-captioned?: N/A (no images)
 * 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? : They are old conversations. Some are about grammar errors, asking for permission to make improvements to sentence structure, and inquiry about deleted sections of the article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? : start, yes; wikiprojects New Zeland, Wikiprojects biography / science and academic, and wikiprojects linguistics and applied linguistics
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? : no

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? : start
 * What are the article's strengths? : Has all necessary elements of a good article, just needs to be expanded on, better organized and edited for grammatical errors.
 * How can the article be improved? : More description, more detail about research and key methods. Could add description about Nations academic career.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? : underdeveloped and 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: