User:Lvargas13/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: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article because it seemed interesting, and the topic is something that I do not have a lot of previous knowledge on, even though I feel fairly familiar with the topic of premenstrual symptoms

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * for the most part, the lead does have a brief description of the major sections of the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * a majority of the information presented in the lead is further unpacked in the article, although there are bits of information which are only mentioned in the lead, and not really further unpacked or explained in detail later in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * it is concise with enough details to know what the rest of the article is going to present.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes. all of the article's content relates back to the topic in some capacity. There is content that is less important to the overall topic, but it still relevant to it. The article did not dedicate a lot of information to the less important aspects of the topic, but instead they were briefly skimmed over
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * the content does appear to be up-to-date. Looking at the sources cited throughout the article, there are sources from as recent as last year. The article cites relevant and up-to-date sources throughout, and although older sources are used to explain the basics of the topic, there are still recent and modern sources used to further expand the topic.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * all of the information that is provided seems as though it adds to the topic, and does not feel out of place. There are no subtopics that I felt were missing from the overall presentation of the topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * the article maintains a neutral tone throughout
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * each time a claim was made, the counter points and arguments were also presented, so I feel as though none of the claims were heavily biased towards a particular position
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * the only viewpoint that seemed partially underrepresented is how PMDD is related to other mental disorders such as depression and anxiety disorders. The article very briefly grazed over that viewpoint, but did not delve as deeply as it did with other viewpoints.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * no, there is no persuasive tone in the article which would indicate the author trying to sway the reader.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes. whenever a fact was presented, multiple sources were used to back up the information
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes, the sources reflect the variety of literature available on the topic
 * Are the sources current?
 * there are older sources, but there are also a wide range of up to date and current sources, dating as recent as last year
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes, the links work

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * yes. the flow and breakdown of the article is clear and easy to follow
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * there were a few grammatical errors that I found as I read through the article
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes, the breakdown reflected the major points of the article and was a breakdown which made the topic easy to digest and follow

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * no images
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * no images
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * no images
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * no images

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * behind the scenes, there were conversations on how to present the topic in a way which is more inclusive to all types of people. The conversations were based around the language used to represent the topic, and how to properly represent the ideas that were eventually presented.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * rated as start class and high importance. the article is a part of the "medicine" and "women's health" WikiProjects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * we haven't covered this topic in class yet. We have maybe quickly passed over symptoms of menstruation and the hormones involved with that process, but we haven't discussed what PMDD is or why it occurs.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * the article is overall a start class article which is well developed and written
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * the strengths are that the article breaks down multiple different aspects of the topic, and the breakdowns are thorough and well developed. The article also maintains a good structure which is clear and easy to follow.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * the article could be improved by fixing the few grammatical mistakes that I saw while reading it, and it could also expand on the viewpoints/connections that I felt were underrepresented in the previously mentioned question.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * i would say that the article is well-developed. It clearly breaks down the various aspects of the topic, and in a clear order which is easy to follow, provides relevant and current information about the topic.

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: