User:Ldjougourian/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)Ceramic
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen to evaluate ceramics because I am interested in the topic, and would like to broaden my knowledge about ceramics. Although my project was about Ifugao, ceramics has always been a passion of mine, especially if I could gain insight through an anthropological lens.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead did a good job on explaining what kind of material ceramics are composed of. However, it does miss historical information about ceramics and how they came about.


 * 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? yes
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? yes

Content

 * Guiding questions

Overall, the content was well. The wiki page has room to add more topics related to ceramics.


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

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The tone of the wiki page was formal, and executed well.


 * Is the article neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? yes

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The sources and references of the wiki page are cited well.


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

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The wiki page was overall very organized, such as dividing the material and property sections.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?no
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The wiki page includes a lot of pictures of ceramics, which is helpful since you get visual representations of the text.


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

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? no conversations
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Rated C class, mid importance. This is part of Engineering, Materials, Glass, Sculptures, Visual arts, South Africa/ PSP SA Wiki Projects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Wikipedia goes more in depth about topics like crystalline and non crystaline, which we didn't discuss in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overal, I was impressed with the article. This article could be informative to those who know nothing about ceramics, what they're composed of, and how they look.


 * What is the article's overall status? very good
 * What are the article's strengths? the way it divided its topics
 * How can the article be improved? improving the introduction with historical background
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? well developed, but has potential to be better.

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: