User:Kmklein1/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.


 * Steven Universe


 * I've recently watched all seasons of this show, so all of the information is still very fresh in my mind, so I can accurately evaluate it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, it describes the television show and network it is on.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, there is an overview of everything.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise and presents a lot of information in a brief, palatable way.

Lead evaluation
This is a strong lead, with correct information that overviews the rest of the article and sets the tone.

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, everything is current and relevant.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes, there are parts of this topic presented dealing with the LGBTQIA community and also women in leadership roles.

Content evaluation
All of the information is up-to-date and relevant to the show. Any information presented that deals with underrepresented populations or topics is handled well and accurately. The content also well-encompasses all aspects, plot-wise and technical, of the show.

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?
 * All of the articles points are widely accepted as true facts with research and evidence to back them.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone in the article remains neutral, while discussing the show as well as the team that worked on the show.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, there are an abundance of resources included in the bibliography and footnotes to back up the facts presented.
 * 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, the talk page also included nominations for authors to better determine the information presented.
 * 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?
 * 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?

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

Images and media evaluation
The images included are well-captioned and set up nicely, but the article could benefit from having a few more images included.

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 were nominations held to decided to include certain topics. Discussions also revolved around what the tone of the article should be,
 * When new information came up, there was discussion on how and if it should be included.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is a part of the Cartoon Network WikiProject. It is rated as a GA-Class article.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It handles information that could easily be biased in a leveled way with an even tone, but somehow keeps the feel of the show infused in it by including direct quotations from people involved.

Talk page evaluation
The talk page is productive and well-structured.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The show has ended, so there is not much new information to add, but the article is still maintained. It is classified as a Level 5 Vital Article.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It presents all of the information without bias, there is no original research, and it is verifiable. It handles underrepresented topics in a responsible manner.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I believe that the real improvement to the article would be to add more pictures or graphics, as that is highly important to the show.
 * 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, complete, and just needs to be regularly maintained for accuracy.

Overall evaluation
This is a very strong Wikipedia article that holds itself to all of the rules and standards of a good article.

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: