User:Leen farra2001/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: Social science
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

As a university student, I have quite a few social science courses that I am obligated to take. Therefore, I chose this article to learn more about the academic discipline of social science and widen my knowledge.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead begins with an introductory sentence that clearly describes the article's topic. It introduces what the definition of social science is, then continues to list the disciplines in social science. However, although the lead introduces the article's major subsections, it does not include a brief description of those sections. In addition, the information provided in the lead is all present and further elaborated in the article. The lead consists of two paragraphs: the first is a brief introduction on social science and the second is on the methodologies used to conduct research. Hence, the lead was not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


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

Content evaluation
The article's content stays on topic and is relevant. Although most sources date back to the 1980's, the content is still considered up-to-date because the content revolves around an academic discipline and generally this information does not change. In addition, the article covers all content that should be discussed and does not include anything that is irrelevant.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral and does not appear biased towards any side. The article simply informs the audience about the academic discipline of social science. The article is heavily factual and shows no distinct opinions. However, the article is in favor of one viewpoint more than the other. The article seems to include more information related to the European world in some sections. In addition, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader of any position.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


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

Sources and references evaluation
All facts in the article are backed up by a reliable secondary source. However, most sources date back to the 1970's which is generally outdated. However, a topic such as an academic discipline does not require continuous updated information as there is no new information covering an introductory article over an academic discipline. In addition, the links that I have checked all work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is concise. clear and easy to read, however, there are a few grammatical errors. Moreover, the article is very well organized as it is divided into sections which reflect the major points of the topic and each section has a headline.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Images and media evaluation
The article includes images which allow the readers to enhance their understanding of the topic. The images are also well-captioned, making the article more clear and easy to follow. In addition, the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. The images are all lined on the right side next to the paragraph that it is linked to, However, some could be bigger to be more appealing.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
There are quite a few conversations in the talk page. One major conversation is a debate over the section of Psychiatry as there were a few editors who disagreed with what Psychiatry is portrayed as. In addition, there was a total of four sources that were edited. There was also a conversation based on the article being more focused on the society in Europe and leaves other people out. The article is rated as a C-class and has been listed as a level-3 vital article in society.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
Overall, the article is clear, organized, and well-written. However, the article is slightly focused on one viewpoint more than the other. Thus, one way the article can improve is by showcasing all viewpoints equally. The article is well-developed but should be further improved.

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: