User:Kjernig/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: Linus Pauling
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I recently read this page to get a background understanding for a paper I recently wrote about sickle cell disease.

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? No
 * 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
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
 * 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? 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? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
 * 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? No
 * 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
 * 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? In the talk section, there was a debate about whether or not to include Pauling's opposition towards quasicrystals. Additionally, there was a mention about whether to include a connection to Pauling's advocacy for the antiviral properties of Vitamin C and the recent link between Vitamin C and the COVID-19 virus.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is involved with multiple WikiProjects and is rated B-class.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This is a topic about a person, so there is much more historical facts involved than what we discuss in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is well-written and informative and has received acknowledgment by the Wikipedia for being a good page.
 * What are the article's strengths? It is organized well, has logical photo placements, and many citations.
 * How can the article be improved? Based on the discussion in the Talk page, the article may have overlooked some of Linus Pauling's criticisms.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Well-developed and only requiring a bit more information to keep the important topics balanced.

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: