User:Joseph PR Campaign/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.


 * Public Humanities: (Public humanities)
 * The base idea behind the article was interesting, as it didn't really describe anything that has to do with the article.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? - Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? - No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? - No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? - Fairly concise, offering a small amount of examples related to the topic.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? - The content is rather list-oriented, not really offering a massive amount of reading material, just lists and links to related fields.
 * Is the content up-to-date? - The article was updated roughly 3 months ago, seems to be up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - Nothing that grabs my attention, if anything it seems like more description could be given to the topic of the article.

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?

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

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? - No.
 * Are images well-captioned? - There are no images unfortunately.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? - See above.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? - See above.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? - Mostly discussion involving wording to make information clearer.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? - No rating that I can discern, but it is part of Wikiproject Literature and Wikiproject History.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? - The discussion here is very dry, but I link that to the fact that it is in all text, which reduces the emotion behind the wording.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Existing, functional, but apparently merely there to be a portal to other sub-pages, or to inform people of the umbrella these other topics are attached to.
 * What are the article's strengths? - direct, to the point, no nonsense.
 * How can the article be improved? - Perhaps a few more anecdotes from experts in the field, speaking to the strengths and the weaknesses of the study.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? - I think the article is developed enough for what the original creators intended purpose is, but it is not grabbing, or prompts an informed examination of the material. It's done, but it's not "pretty".

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: