User:Lindsey.Goldsby/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: Urticina
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because it does not include sufficient information.

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 is just one sentence. It needs more information. But, because the article itself does not really have any information, I guess this lead is appropriate for this article.

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 is relevant, but there is not enough content. I am not sure if the information present is up-to-date. The whole article still needs to be written though.

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 overrepresented, 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 has appropriate tone and balance. It is completely neutral.

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
Some of the information is cited by a reliable source, but not all of the links work. Also, this article does not reflect the literature available for the topic.

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
What there is of this article is well-written without grammatical errors, but it is not well-organized and it needs more sections.

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 one picture it includes is appealing, well-captioned, and cited. It just needs more pictures.

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 aren't any conversations about this page in particular. But, it is a part of two projects: the WikiProject Animals and the WikiProject Marine Life. It is rated as stub-class for its quality and low for importance. I think that the way Wikipedia discusses this topic is different from how we talk about it in class because it doesn't consider this genus to really be notable at all. I understand why they rate it that way, but in class we really value the variety of invertebrates that exist and I think the point is that they are all important.

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
The overall status of this article is very low. I don't really think it has any strengths and almost everything could easily be improved. It is very poorly-developed.

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: