User:KemistryKody/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: Bark Beetle
 * Article was chosen because this is an issue that was a very central point of contention in my childhood.

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 but only very weakly
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It's a bit over-detailed but mostly just poorly written.

Lead evaluation
Below average

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Seems to be, yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * It seems that the article could definitely use an expansion

Content evaluation
Below Average

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?
 * I have no idea. There are 9 unique and solid sources cited but I'm unsure how large the breadth of source material is on this subject.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Most have been written after 2005. A few are less current
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
Average

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * No
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * No; There is only one section

Organization evaluation
Poor

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I think so
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Kind of...

Images and media evaluation
Average

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 only a few posts on the talk page but they are mostly suggestions on what to make better in the page. A lot of comments about formatting and writing flow.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is part of three wikiprojects: Insects, Beetles, and Forestry. It is rated as C-class but appears that it may be up for review to be promoted to B-class.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have never exactly talked about bark beetles in class...

Talk page evaluation
Underwhelming

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * A solid start with lots of room for improvement
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * A solid history and thorough taxonomy
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Better writing flow with less subjective statements.
 * More sections added (currently only one section)
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped

Overall evaluation
Once again, a solid start with lots of room for improvement

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: