User:Justinlambright/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: Hydrothermal vent
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because hydrothermal vents are an important aspect of deep sea biology and they have a large effect on its environment and life in the deep sea.

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? Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, it talks about the presence of hydrothermal vents on Saturn and Jupiter's moons, but these topics are not mentioned in the rest of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise and gives a good overview of the topic of hydrothermal vents and a good description of what to find in the article.

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 the 21st of this month.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I can not determine if there is missing content, but it seems like the article was crafted thoroughly and effective sources were used.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, it does a good job of presenting all of the facts about hydrothermal vents in an unbiased manner which is essential for articles relating to science.
 * 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? Yes, each fact in this article is backed up by its own source
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, there are 89 overall sources that are used in this article and they all depict something about hydrothermal vents or its environment.
 * Are the sources current? There are a lot of sources from the late 1900s which shows that it is not the most current, but there are also sources from the 2000s that are added as well. This shows that the article is still being evaluated to this day.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? None that are obvious
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, there are pictures of hydrothermal vents and animals that live near hydrothermal vents as well.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

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 conversations about some paragraphs being depicted like an advertisement, and these sections have been deleted.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes, this article has been listed as a level 5 article and it is part of 4 WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It goes more in depth about how these hydrothermal vents were found and what instruments were used.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is considered a vital article by Wikipedia's standards.
 * What are the article's strengths? It gives a good overview of the topic of hydrothermal vents and it has reliable sources to back up all facts.
 * How can the article be improved? More up to date sources (i.e. less sources from the 1900s if possible)
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? The article is well 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: