User:Keggan14/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: Strike and dip
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Because strike and dips relate to structural geology and i would like to know how it is presented and described online.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
This Lead has a introductory sentence and describes strike and dip well, this article only has one section so a brief description is unnecessary. The lead presents everything in the body and the lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
Everything in the lead is relevant to the topic and nothing distracted me. The topic is up to date as it refers smartphones being used to take strike and dip and some further content may be added but i dont know what specifically to add.

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 over represented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is from a neutral standpoint. This article takes into account multiple ways to take strike and dip and therefor is no biased. everything is presented equally, and is not written in an attempt to persuade.

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?

Sources and references evaluation
Yes this article sites multiple books and the sources are thorough. The sources range from 1916 - 2010, so they are relatively up to date. The links work fine.

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?

Organization evaluation
This article is easy to read and well organized, and everything is spelled correct.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
Yes the images help to understand the topic, one image labeled strike and dip could be better captioned with a variable description of variables in the picture. Pictures adhere to Wikipedia's regulations. The images are laid out in a appealing fashion.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
They are talking about confusion about the definition of apparent dip and if you need trig to calculate actual dip. This article is part of the WikiProject Geology, this article talks about different methods to find strike and dip and also using your phone to measure strike and dip.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
The article is very well written but may be improved by adding more diagrams explaining apparent dip and actual dip. I also think this article could use more development.

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: