User:Ktjannat/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: (link)
 * Interpersonal deception theory
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Given on the importance of relational communication, I chose this article, as it illustrates a significant theory to the understanding of relational maintenance.

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, it doesn't
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is pretty much concise and clear to easily understand.

Content
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * No, it is not up-to-date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * In general, the content is good. However, the organization of the content could be better. In addition, it could demonstrate more research areas/perspectives explicitly rather than just ‘Online Dating’ in order to understand the application of this theory (IDT) more effectively. Besides, some citations are missing.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Not really
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Overall, it’s pretty much balanced. However, the section of example about research areas/studies could be more extensive and updated.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No, it’s pretty much neutral.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Not quite, some citations are missing and it definitely needs to add more supporting data/citations.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Not at all
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, it works fine

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, pretty much.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not really
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, the sections are broken down well

Images and Media
Guiding questions:


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No, it doesn’t contain any images
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

Checking the talk page
Guiding questions:


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * It doesn’t have notable conversations behind the scenes, however, it does emphasize on including up-to-date information to improve the article. In my opinion, it could add more research/studies from different dimensions to the understanding of the topic to a greater extent.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Yes, this article has been rated as Start-Class on the project’s quality scale, and as Mid-importance on the project’s importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The topic ‘Interpersonal Deception Theory’ hasn’t been really covered yet in our class. However, it does connect in a similar way to our class discussions on other relational theories. For instance, covering the key concepts along with the examples, background, theoretical perspectives, etc.

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is very much significant in terms of relational communication. It does explain well and contain several perspectives. However, it requires up-to-date information and more citations. Overall, the organization could be better.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Easy to follow the patterns of the content and understand it. Most significant keywords were clearly defined along with the connecting literature.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Again, it needs to include more citations and to update.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I would say moderate. Some categories could be more elaborated along with the up-to-date information. The categories of the content could be more explicitly structured. In addition, some images could be added in terms of organization and explanation.

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: