User:Kp1954/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.


 * Emotion : Emotion
 * I have chosen to edit this article, "emotion," because of my interest in perception of emotion in varying emotional states. I also wonder if the perception of emotion will vary with the different kinds of theories of emotion.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes ("Emotions are biological states associated with the nervous system brought on by neurophysiological changes variously associated with thoughts, feelings, behavioural responses, and a degree of pleasure or displeasure.")
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It kind of does include a brief description of the article's major sections as the last paragraph of the lead proposes that emotion is studied and interpreted differently in many fields of study which connects with the major section such as "theories," "classification," and "disciplinary approaches."
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, the lead provides a brief discussion about the major sections in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Considering how dense the rest of the writing on the article is, the lead seems to be rather concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the theories and approaches to emotion in the article reflects upon current studies as well as historical recordings of emotions.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No. The major sections, classification, theories, emotion formation, and disciplinary approaches, all belongs to the studies surrounding the topic, emotion. The content of the article is very detailed rather than missing any contents.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, although the article states numerous theories, the article doesn't take one side.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, all viewpoints are represented equally.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The article only states the fact (and theories) and doesn't attempt to persuade the reader to one side.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * All facts have hyperlinks/footnotes backed up by a reliable source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources attached to the writing/points of the article are trustworthy.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, the sources are current and clear (sometimes, dense).
 * 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?
 * The article is well-written with crisp clear writing and the right amount of details.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * The article doesn't seem to have grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is very well-organized, broken down into specific sections which support the lead.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes. The article includes few images that enhance the understanding of the topic, emotion.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, the images are all well-captioned with titles and sometimes even with author and dates.
 * 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?
 * Emotion is a complex mechanism and not one theory can define emotions.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated C-class. There is a WikiProjects on Psychology/Emotion.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia states the theories and studies on emotions such as an evaluation of categories of emotion, however, how perception changes how we see others' emotions is considered important in class. The textbook for "perception" states that the recognization of face can be different and distinct from our perception.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article, overall, is very well written with details. What makes the article better is that it clearly states that no one definite theory of emotion is correct nor the debate on emotion has been terminated (the discussion is rather ongoing).
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article well categorized theories of emotion.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article lacks the discussion between perception and emotion (which is what I mainly hoped to find in the article).
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article seems to be adequately developed with a few major sections and supporting contents.

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: