User:Julia.jt.1100/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: Ethnomethodology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. It is a topic I want to learn more about.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

The Lead contains information at the beginning that describes the topic. Starting first with a definition of Ethnomethodology.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

Somewhat of a description at the beginning.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

It references a few of the topics the article will go into. However, not everything and the references are on the subtle side.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

Yes


 * Is the content up-to-date?

Yes, the last edit was on September 7, 2020.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

None that can be found.


 * 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?

It is primarily factual and the topic does not go into any controversial subjects, meaning it is neutral.

Not in particular. The different characteristics of ethnomethodology and the topic's application to the world is underrepresented. There is just subtle and small hints to encourage readers to learn more about ethnomethodology.
 * 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

Some, but I do not believe that there is enough. The sources appear thorough and relate to the article's topic. All of the sources are more than 5 years old, so, no. There's little diversity in authors, some authors were cited more than once. It appears most are white. Yep!
 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The piece is concise and clear, though appears to only have surface level information. None that I caught. Very organized and related to the topic. However, a few are mainly just to compare ethanomethodology with other subjects.
 * 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

No :( There's one image and it does not have a caption at all. Yes. Not really since there's only one image.
 * 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

There are actually a lot of conversations going, a mix of some people complimenting certain subjects. Though, most seem to be constructive criticism in content and format. It has a Start-Class rating on Wikipedia's quality scale and a high-importance rating. The article is a part of the WikiProject Science section too. This subject has not quite been covered in this class or any of my classes that I have taken so far.
 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

As stated previously, it has a Start-Class rating on Wikipedia's quality scale and a high-importance rating. It provides a nice, easy to read overview of ethnomethodology for beginners in the subject to get an insight of what the topic is about. Having more information in how it applies to modern day science and key discoveries ethnomethodology has covered in the past could enhance the quality even further. It ranges between underdeveloped and well-developed. What is has is good so far, but I see it being more thorough in its subject matter.
 * 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?