User:Laurela2020/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: (Archaeological looting)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article to evaluate because when I heard about archaeological looting in my archaeology class, it sounded interesting to me.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the lead's introductory sentence is the definition of archaeological looting.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead is the only section of this article, so it only gives a brief introduction to the topic.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The lead is the only section of this article so it provides all of the information for the page.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead seems somewhat concise, I think it is a bit confusing and could use some more organization to make more sense.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The only content on the page is in the lead, but what is in the lead is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * From what I know about archaeological looting at this point, the page seems up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I think that there needs to be more content on the different types of archaeological looting and there needs to be a section on the page about why archaeological looting is bad.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article does seem neutral to me.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There does not seem to me to be any heavily biased statements in the article.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I do not see any viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No the article does not seem to persuade in one way or another.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * I think that the statement in the article about what countries are considered rich in archaeology could use a source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * There needs to be more sources on the article, I think that using the American Journal of Archaeology on an article about archaeology was good.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are from within the last 15 years, which could be considered current because archaeology has been going on for a long time.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, both of the links work for me.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is easy to read but some of the statements I believe could use sources to back them up.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I do not see any grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * There are not any sections to this article beyond the lead of the article.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No, there are not any included images.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * There are no images in this article.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * There are no images in this article.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * There are no images in this article.

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 are no conversations on the talk page of this article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated of high importance on the project's importance scale. It is part of two WikiProjects, Archaeology and Crime.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not learned much beyond what archaeology looting is in class, so this article goes beyond the scope of what we have learned in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's status is that it needs more sections on the topic included on it.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Some of the strengths include that the definition was provided correctly.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * It can be improved by the use of more sources and more information on the topic.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I think that the article has a good start and it definitely needs more information to add to it.

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: Talk:Archaeological looting