User:LydiaRay.19/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) 2001 Arkansas Razorbacks football team
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article because I do not know very much about football and I hope to learn more.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes this article includes an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the articles topic, by explaining where the team has played and how they represented the University of Arkansas.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No the Lead doesn't include a brief description of the article's major sections because the main focus in the lead is where the Razorbacks have played, how they represented the University of Arkansas, and how they got to the Cotton Bowl.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No the Lead doesn't cover information that is not present in the article, it is short and to the point.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise, it is very to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic. Throughout the article it discusses the major games the Arkansas Razorback football team played and how they made it to the Cotton Bowl.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, it discusses the major games they played to get to the Cotton Bowl in 2001.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No the article only includes information related to the topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * This article is neutral because it isn't biased of any one team.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No there are not any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position. This article holds information and statistics based on the Arkansas Razorbacks football team.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I did not find that there were any viewpoints that were overrepresented, or underrepresented. The article discussed the team's overall points for that game and some important plays that were made by both teams.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * I do not feel that the article is trying to persuade the reader at all, it is very informative.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes, for some of the information given the article does use reliable secondary source of information. I think there could be more sources pulled into this article.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are thorough because they focus on the information relating to the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes, the sources are up to date on the information given.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, the links I clicked on work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, this article is concise, clear, and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * While reading this article I did not find any spelling errors or grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is broken down into the schedule, game summaries, coaching staff, roaster, and the awards and honors.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * This article includes a table of the schedule which makes it easy to follow. It also includes charts of the total points for the games discussed.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, the article includes the sources of the charts that have been used.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, because it includes the sources of the charts/tables used.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, it is easy to look at and get the information needed from it.

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 kind of conversation going on about how to represent this topic is probably focused around not being biased and including the appropriate information that is needed to inform the reader on the main topic.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * This article was rated a C-Class. This article is a part of a WikiProjects for college football.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article has a mid-importance rating on the project. The article is very informative and uses charts to help give a better image for the reader.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article is concise and clear. It stays on focus with the main topic of discussing the games the Arkansas Razorbacks played to get to the Cotton Bowl. It also lists the sources for the image and the images are easy to read. This article is also easy to follow and read because it is well organized.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * This article could use more secondary sources. It could also go more into detail with the individual games that were played instead of just including the highlights.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * This article does seem to be a little underdeveloped because of the lack of details in a few areas of the article.

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: