User:M.2.woolley/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.


 * Spoon Theory: Spoon theory
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The Lead is a very concise paragraph, however, the introductory sentence is unclear and difficult to follow. There is no description of the article's major sections, just a brief description of how spoon theory is used.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
The article's content is very relevant to the topic. They content gives a brief explanation of where the metaphor stems from as well as a more detailed description of who the spoon theory is used by and what it describes. There could be more concrete examples and visuals to show how and why a person experiences a degree of fatigue. It could also go into more detail about the manipulation of the spoon theory for the marginalization of the disability community.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is fairly neutral as it mostly discusses the facts of where the spoon theory comes from and what it is used to describe. The author does not try to convince the reader about the legitimacy of the spoon theory, only really going into detail about the significance of the theory. The article only grazes over the marginalization of people with invisible disabilities. In this way it is not clear whether the author is in support of the use of the spoon theory or those who use it.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
The article uses numerous recourses to back up information. These are mostly only news articles available on the internet. While there do seem to be a multitude of sources on this page, at least one of the articles did not go to the correct article, and the navigation is confusing as their is both a bibliography and reference section with different citations and links. The sources are mostly from 2016 to 2018, making them all fairly relevant to the times. However, many of these articles are news articles that do not delve deeply into chronic illness and specific utilization of the spoon theory and marginalization of those in the disabilities community.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
The article is not well written. While the general idea is there, it is not organized in a way that allows for strong comprehension. Background information on the topic is not given until the last paragraph, and there is no conclusion paragraph at all. I do think there could be a better break down of topics overall.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
There was only one image of spoons. This image did not enhance the understanding of the topic, although did have a strong caption explaining the relevancy. The image is visually appealing, however, a graphic could be created that is much more informative and allows the reader to understand the use of "spoons" throughout a person's day.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
There is talk about the reliability of the spoon theory in general as well as the sources that are cited. According to this section the Spoon Theory page is not peer reviewed or credible and is a piece of "original thought". There is talk about naming it "Spoon Metaphor" instead of Spoon Theory as it is not a scientific hypothesis, but a tool for various people to explain affects of their disability or conditions. There is also mention of negative language used towards disabled people within the article. This writer refers to non-disabled people as "healthy". I thought it was an inappropriate phrase as it suggests that all disabled people are sick and therefore in need of treatment to be "fixed".

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
Overall the article does give the reader an idea of what spoon theory is, however it is necessary that it be organized in a different manner. There should also be research done about the finding of the spoon theory and other information as people in the "Talk" section believe the sources are unreliable.

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: