User:Lilbitkait/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: Addiction
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I thought it was a interesting topic and has personal connection to my family life experience.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, they explain what the definition of Addiction is and what is connected to it.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, it explains the rewards and the pathology that contribute to it.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Everything included in the Lead is present somewhere throughout the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I think that the Lead is concise with the data that you read later on but it isn't overly detailed providing too much detail in such a compacted introduction so you have to go further to learn more detail about the key terms.

Lead evaluation
Overall the Lead did a great job in providing the basic information needed to lead the the subsections throughout the rest of the page. it hit on key points and provided the basic definition on what Addiction is. I would say even though it is a very simplistic introduction paragraph it is still detailed and hits all the key points necessary to make the reader move further down the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? It is relevant to the topic of Addiction because it hits on different key points that contribute to the disorder of Addiction but also the science behind it.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The content is up-to-date. the latest date of something connected to addiction was dated for the year 2019 so it is seen that the page was published recently.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? From the simplest definition of what Addiction is all the way to what each type of addiction affects are and detailed description on how to handle them I would visually say that nothing is missing. this article is detailed in every aspect and really breaks down what the disorder of Addiction has entailed for an individual who could suffer from it.

Content evaluation
I think this article is written very well in terms of content and really touches on every sub-subject of what is attached to Addiction. for each section it stays on topic and is still relevant to the overall topic at hand. it is not out of date because recent information is provided goes as far back as last year.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? I would say the article is pretty neutral. it focuses on all contributors and goes into even detail for each one making each factor as relevant as the next.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? None were seen during visual evaluation.
 * 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? No.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article didn't really have a bias view of one sub-topic more than another. it was more of a general knowledge article meaning that it provided equal information for each topic and just talked about what they were and how they were contributors to Addiction.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? From reviewing the article it looked like anything that was cited has a source citation connected to it backing up their information and showing that they used sources to provide this information to the reader.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current? there are current articles from last year. so yes the articles are current providing updated information.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? After testing a few articles it was seen that the links do in fact work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? the article is pretty cohesive making the article very easy to read and understand.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? It doesn't look to me that the article has any grammatical or spelling errors to me.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? the article is broken into sections of the key points on Addiction.

Organization evaluation
overall the page on Addiction is very organized and well put together. it is neatly put into sections for each topic introduced to help you understand each one in better detail. it also doesn't seem to visually have any grammatical or spelling errors.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? the article does include images for some of the sections to help give people a visual on the importance of that sub-topic
 * Are images well-captioned? the images are well captioned showing the correlation between the caption and what each part of the image shows.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? they don't seem to be breaking any of Wikipedia's rules so they are capable of staying where they are.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? the images are either on the side of the sub-section and or if enlarged placed right near the information relevant with it.

Images and media evaluation
The images that are shown on this page are put near and show correlation with the sub-sections in a orderly fashion. the look presentable and with them information is provided giving you more detail on how to look at the image but also on what the image is in reference to.

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 is conversation on adding articles to the page, and different comments on changes and recommendations.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? the article was rated as B-Class and is in interest to multiple Wiki-projects going on.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It goes into detail about things we probably wont be able to during lecture or even from just reading the chapters assigned.

Talk page evaluation
the Talk page is active in people contributing and making changes were they need to be changed. also helpful feedback is provided making this article a good rating and making it be seen as recommended for projects on Wiki.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I think this is a strongly put together article.
 * What are the article's strengths? The strengths are the cohesive movement of the page and the simple work you have to go through to find the information important to you.
 * How can the article be improved? I think it could look into the changes suggested on the Talk page and see if that only improves the legitimate status this page could have.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I think the article is well-developed.

Overall evaluation
this is a well written and cohesive page. it makes sure the reader is capable of finding the information needed but also making sure that it makes sense all together. overall I would go to this article if I needed information on Addiction.

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: Kaitlyn ~