User:Ly-So99/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: Viola Cordova
 * The article is a philosophical stub regarding Viola Cordova, a Native American Woman's, biography. There is nothing in the article regarding her philosophical views, only the papers and documents which she produced during her lifetime.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The article does include a brief introduction of Cordova and her background.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead doesn't include an introduction into the article's major sections, of which there are two - regarding her life, and her major works.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead doesn't include information that isn't present in the article, but since it is a very short lead there isn't a lot of information to be elaborated upon.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is overly concise on the grounds that the article is a stub.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article provides the most relevant information on the subject available in Viola Cordova's short body of works.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, all the content is up-to-date regarding Cordova's works before her death.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The material missing in this article is the ideas and logic to her philosophy that is contained within her work.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article is incredibly neutral on account of being short.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There are no viewpoints that are biased within the article, although her work section is lengthy in it's format.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, all the facts within the article either lead to external articles or are drafted from credible secondary sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are thorough in the information they cover, but the list of works in the center of the article are not divulged upon and therefore don't articulate the mature natural philosophy Cordova developed over her lifetime.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources are all current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is overly concise and is missing information in regards to the relevance of Cordova's works as influential or non-influential pieces.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is well-organized but sparsely populated, particularly the second regarding her works, which simply lists the works and doesn't divulge their content.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article does not include images.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Without images, the article feels even more lacking.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * There are no images.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * There are 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?
 * There is only a single conversation regarding the person who created the article, and that individual works for the University of Mexico, which Cordova attended. That being said, they do not indicate having a personal relationship with the subject matter aside from that.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article isn't rated, and is part of the philosophy stubs WikiProject.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This topic is so underpopulated that it's difficult to gesture to the value of the information's existence without further enhancement of the content contained within the article. The lack of journalism on Cordova's life means that the information may lie irrelevant forever - the only related expansions that I can personally conceive of are divulging upon her works.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article's overall status is sadly underwhelming in my opinion.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article's strengths is that it appears to contain nearly all relevant text on Cordova's life.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article could be improved by journalistic work - reaching out to the University of Mexico and discovering more information about Cordova and her life would expand the breadth and importance of the content contained within Cordova's article. Someone should also read through her entire body of work and derive major points of her philosophy to articulate within her article as a subsection. There's also a lack of expansion on why and how her position as the first female Native-American philosophy is relevant to society.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * This article is severely underdeveloped.

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:
 * Talk:Viola Cordova