User:LaurenAnderson1/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.


 * Goblin shark: (Goblin shark)
 * I chose to evaluate this page because I was really intrigued by the different types of deep-sea sharks we talked about on the first day of class. While researching the different species of sharks, I came across the goblin shark which can live over 4,000 feet below the surface. I wanted to learn more about this shark species and the lamniforme order of sharks. I discovered this page while browsing through the different WikiProjects.

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, each section is directly mentioned in the lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is very concise. There is roughly one sentence that corresponds to each section or subsection of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the information revolves around the goblin shark.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Overall, the content is up-to-date with the most recent articles from 2016. However, more recent articles or research could be added to enhance the article.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, content is well-organized and relevant.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented? No, the facts are presented in a straight-forward, neutral manner.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it presents the facts and information as they are.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, a wide variety of academic journal articles were called upon for this article. The articles are from reputable sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, the article is thoroughly written and covers all of the important scientific facts about goblin sharks.
 * Are the sources current? The articles are mostly current with the most recent articles written in 2016. Some articles are slightly more outdated.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, links to the references work as well as links embedded within the article.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it is very concise and clear. There is no flowery language; everything is based on the facts.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? None that take away from the content of the article.
 * 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 very intuitively and progress in a logical manner.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes; however, more pictures would be beneficial and add to the reader's understanding of the goblin shark.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, they are explanatory but succinct.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, they are added to relevant sections of the text based on the picture.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The only discussion is regarding what is considered to be "deep" in the ocean.The article concluded that referred to any part deeper than 200m.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes, it is part of the WikiProject Fishes. This project is a branch off of the WikiProject Tree of Life. Additionally, it is considered to be under the scope of WikiProject Sharks.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? No, it remains straightforward and clear.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? As of 2013, the goblin shark article is recorded as a "featured article" and recorded to have been one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article is very well-written because it is clear, easy to follow and uses simple language. All scientific terms and related species/orders of sharks are linked to the page which provides ample background material for those looking to learn more. It is easy to follow the flow of the article and understand the details of the goblin shark.
 * How can the article be improved? I think more images of the shark would be beneficial to help visualize the shark's unique anatomical features.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that the article is very well-developed with a clear focus and concise explanations.

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: