User:LPScanlon/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.


 * Signwriter: (link)
 * Chosen to evaluate it because I'm interested in either editing this article or the "sign painting" article.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * Lead does have an introductory sentence, a Contentx box and it is concise.


 * 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?
 * It has a Contents box, yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Not exactly, although the lead doesn't match up terribly well with the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * Most of the article's content is somewhat relevant to the topic. Some is not. What is relevant is patchy and incohesive.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * I don't think so - I think it could use more information - there is more to sign writing than this
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I believe there is missing content

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions
 * The articles is essentially neutral, although it seems to be written by someone who prefers traditional hand lettering over vinyl. I will be interested to find out how "signwriting" is defined in literature.  It might only include hand lettering - I'm not sure.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Essentially, yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Possibly biased toward hand-lettering ("most beautiful")
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Possibly that hand-lettering or traditional sign painting is more represented/preferred.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Possibly towards regarding hand-lettering higher than vinyl.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * There are no sources.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No. No sources are listed.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Again - no sources.
 * Are the sources current?
 * No sources.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * No sources.

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * It's not well organized. It rambles a bit and is not cohesive.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * No - it's not concise. It repeats in places, looks like a bunch of separate sentences written by different people.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * No. There is effort here, but it's messy.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * The images are fine. I don't think they are the best examples, but that may be a matter of opinion.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The images are OK.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, but not cited.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I'm not sure how to tell, but they aren't credited so I'm going to say no.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * They are fine - I'll need to look at other images on other pages to see what could be done better in terms of layout on this platform.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions
 * There is no information on the talk page.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There don't seem to be any conversations yet.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Yes - it's in 3 WikiProjects. It's rated "Start Class" for all three and "Mid-Importance" for two.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't discussed this topic in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Start status. Medium importance.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Not sure what this means. Start?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Basic structure appears to be in place.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * By adding citations and sources.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped/poorly 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
 * I'm not comfortable doing this. There is no conversation happening here, so I'm reluctant to start a conversation with a question.

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback:

--LPScanlon (talk) 19:49, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

--LPScanlon (talk) 19:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)