User:Krao01/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: Water supply and sanitation in Peru
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This article is in direct relation to the cause I am focusing on for my practice experience for my minor. I think that this source does a good job talking about the context and issues with water sourcing in Peru.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
''The introductory sentence is in regards to the evolution of the Peruvian water system over the last 30 years. I think it would be appropriate for an advancements section but not so much a section that is introductory. The lead does include a brief overview of the different sub topics that are included in the article, and makes sure to only include information that is touched on later in the article. It is pretty concise, but I think the statement would have benefitted from some more generalizations of the text and topic at hand.''

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
''The article tastefully touches on all subtopics in relation to the topic in a thoughtful way, with no mention of any information that could be considered irrevelant or extraneous. It mentions history, approaches, responsibility, policy attached to the water system management, and more. There are resources primarily from 2000 onwards, which is good that it is from this century, but the most recent piece of information I could find was from 2018.''

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
''In an initial scan of the article, there does not seem to be any usage of biased, or coded words, which implies that the information is neutral and does not carry other meanings or implications, and presents the information objectively. I do not see any claims that are heavily biased towards specific parties or ideologies. I think that the information is presented concisely and not in a way that overwhelms the reader. There is a lot of contextual information, so I think that the article may benefit from some more information about the actual infrastructure of the water system. I do not sense any persuasion in the text as it stands.''

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
''There are over 50 references and sources in the article, and from a pass over, every bit seems to be supported. There is a wide variety fo sources available that describe said facts. The latest source is from 2018, meaning the article could be a tad more updated. Every link that was clicked is a working one.''

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?

Organization evaluation
''The different subtopics within the larger topic fit well and make sense in the way that it is written. There are no visible grammatical and spelling errors, and the author made sure to separate each topic in a way that made sense to it. The different sections make sense to the topic.''

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Images and media evaluation
''The article includes a picture of glacier icecaps important to Peruvian water supply, and other general geographic images of locations mentioned. There are no photos of water systems as mentioned or anything in relevance. The images are relatively simply captioned, which I think would have benefitted from more information. There have also been numerous copyright claims. The images are sparse, making a good portion of the article text heavy.''

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
''Most of the conversations are in relation to copyright claims, and how the water supply and sanitation in Peru fall into larger related WikiProjects. This article has a rating of B-class on the quality scale.''

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
''I enjoyed the article but also think that it can be greatly improved. I think the organization is very strong but there can be a balance between sections, more images, and the inclusion of more recent developments. I think the article is well developed.''

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: