User:Kiki0517/Evaluate an Article

History of the social sciences
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: History of the social sciences
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Because I enjoy reading about history and thought it was interesting to see how the field of social sciences came to be and the various diverse fields that fall under social sciences.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes it does but could use more details.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes it talks about the 18th century but it is not present in the article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It could use some improvement to be a bit more concise to give a brief summary of what to expect

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * No it is missing the 21st century in my opinion and has dated sources needs a mix of past and current resources.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes they still need more details on the Late Modern Section, I think their should be a 21st century section as well as more info on the 18th century that they mentioned in the lead but not in the article.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * not that I caught. No it does not.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes it basically just stating facts and history.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Not that I caught.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No I think it is a little underrepresented in the Late Modern section and is missing the 21st century to show where we are now.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No I did not think so I felt like it was just talking about historical facts and discoveries of people in social science.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes but they need more citations needed for the source of information and I think more sources would be beneficial.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * They could use some improvements and they need to add more citations to the article.
 * Are the sources current?
 * They could use some more current sources since so much has changed since for example 1985 or 1999.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * No it needs more diversity
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * A few show no information found

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It's needs more details to be a little more clear in my opinion and it is a little dull to read so I think the details will help. It's also missing in my opinion a 21 century section.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I caught.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes it is very organized into each era to speak about the history of social sciences.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No images posted
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * No images posted
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * No images posted
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No images posted

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * What led to the field of social sciences and how different people around the world discovered different important
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Level 5 - History of Science WikiProject
 * Rated top- importance and start-class for quality scale

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?


 * Not to different I felt it needed more citations and diversity.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is fair but definitely has room for improvement.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It's organization of sections for the different points in history.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More diversity and citations and more research sources.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I think it is still in the process of developing into a better article and needs work.

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: