User:LingClassmate/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.


 * Discrimination in the United States: Discrimination in the United States
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because the Civil Rights Era was always interesting to me because it makes me admire all these heroes that stood up for their basic human rights and be treated like people. I always admire the Civil Rights Era because they were the stepping stone and the foundation of the society and mentality that we have today. Even though they didn't totally get rid of racism, because it still exists today, I think it was a HUGE stepping stone into the right direction and they did not stop until they made a difference.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The introductory sentence, although worded terrible with improper grammar, starts with the definition of discrimination. Although I think that a good start to the topic, its not what the topic is about, the topic is about discrimination in the US, not what is discrimination.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead does not have a brief description of the article's major sections, it just talks about what discrimination is, not about the discrimination there is and was in the United States. It was not specific to the topics that are later explained, no brief history or examples of what there was and is in the United States.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The entire lead is just about the definition of discrimination, which isn't in the article or what it is about. The definition is nice for what it is and should be in the lead however it should not be the entire lead. The article is about discrimination in the United States, although the article talks about the different types of discrimination (racial and sexual) there is in the United States, I don't think the definition is enough (brief) information about what was going on in the US.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead overall is not detailed at all, just only including the definition also is not concise to what the article is about.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes the article maintains relevancy throughout it keeps its focus on discrimination and goes through some basic knowledge that is commonly taught it is also tying many key parts of the civil rights era.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * it's up to date on one section detailing in the LGBTQ movement and how the efforts back then continue today to prevent discrimination but it doesn't go into detail about the recent black lives matter protests and how the civil rights movement isn't over.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Nothing is really missing except for the BLM protests but the article takes into account over recent court cases dealing with LGBTQ matters.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Yes it does talk about historically underreported groups as the author decided to go into detail on the civil rights movement which doesn't have much fleshed out material so its great to see more on this topic since it is still necessary today.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * No the article isn't neutral as it doesn't focus heavily on all types of discrimination in America as the title suggests but rather only African Americans and a short paragraph on LGBTQ lives.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No there are no such biases in the article it is all equal in tone and in nature.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The only viewpoints that feel underrepresented are gender discrimination and sexual orientation discrimination with less than a paragraph of information and little to know sources it makes the reader feel less informed on that topic than before.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No the article only talks about the discrimination but doesn't take a stand and persuade the reader to pick a side. Although it learns towards the

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes the references tab has detailed articles from several universities and government sites that have information and statistics presented in the article.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes the sources are thorough they include relevant information but there could be more that help the article.
 * Are the sources current?
 * No many of the sources come from archives and sources from the early 2000's but the article was talking about previous events in history talking about discrimination
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * The authors all come from high end universities and news stations and yes they include the marginalized individuals in their sources
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes most of the links work and are accurate to what the author is talking about

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is well written but the paragraphs aren't concise and a little wordy.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Yes the article does have many grammar errors because it looks like it junior high kid wrote it.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes the article is broken up into sections but the article could use some sections within the main topic sections to use it. The main topic sections aren't what the subsections are talking about so they could either be more broad or be broken into more specific main topics.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article includes 2 pictures, however they don't really enhance the understanding of the topic. The first picture showed an example of what African Americans faced and the second one was just what the US aimed to be. But it didn't how the discrimination that most people felt.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The first picture is captioned with "most places were segregated" which doesn't add to the topic, its just stating something. The second picture is not captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * They they do credit the artists and to the eye do adhere to copyright regulations since they do give credit.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images are scene to just be "thrown" in there, you would not notice them if you were just reading the article, they are also small so they aren't appealing to the eye.

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 topic should be represented by both angles on the past and in the future. For example, today we see racism as a bad thing because we were taught that everyone is equal because of the Civil Rights Era and what happened in history. However, back then people didn't see anything wrong with it because it was the normal. Now if you said something racists or sexists or anything discriminatory you would be shamed and consequences would be served but back then that didn't happened because that was the normal.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as a C-class project for WikiProjects of United States.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * The wikipedia discusses the topic more in a relaxed tone or as if you were just trying to give someone the gist of discrimination. While in class we talk about cultures in a deep and respectful tone, we make sure that our facts are correct because these people fought for something and they should be treated as such.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall I give it a D because it does have a theme and it is informative to a point however it is not well written and doesn't have all the facts.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article is easy to read, in the way that it feels a junior high student wrote it.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * It needs to be edited for grammar and it needs to have more information that is cited and quoted correctly.
 * 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 underdeveloped because it think its more of an outline to what the article is.

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: