User:Littlemissgemini/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: Grand Council (Qing dynasty)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: because the book we are reading in class is pretty close to the Qing dynasty.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

It does include a clear descriptive introductory sentence. And it does include a very brief description of the article's major section. It is pretty concise.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article's content is relevant to the topic, and I do not think there are contents that does not belong to the topic. But I also don't think it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations and topics.


 * 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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is presented in a neutral tone. And I do not see any heavily biased comments. I do not think the article attempts to persuade the reader in favour of either side.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * The sources are baked up by a university research. There's only one links in the citation. And the one link does not work. They do include historically marginalised individuals throughout the article.


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is broken down into sections, with a clear heading for each section. Which makes it easy to read.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * There are images that enhance the understanding of the topic. And the images are well-captioned. And they are presented in a visually appealing way.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There's one conversation about the arrangement of the images.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article seems informational, with small sections, and images. But there are very limited links in the references, and the only does not work. Which makes the article not very reliable. It could improve by backing informations up with valid links and cites. I think it would be considered as not very well developed


 * 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?

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: