User:MJT027/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)
 * Handicap (golf)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose to evaluate this article, because I am interested in learning how course handicaps in Golf are calculated, and what goes into calculating them.

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?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * No

Lead evaluation
The Lead explains the basic definition of what a golf handicap is, along with an extremely brief history about how the World Handicap System was created.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * No

Content evaluation
This article about golf handicaps contain information about its history, explains what goes into calculating a course's handicap as well as an individual's handicap, equations on how to calculate these handicaps and how they can be evaluated. It also explains what the World Handicap System is, why it was created, and how it can be calculated along with other forms of Handicapping Systems. This allows the reader to be able to compare the systems to one another, and see what aspects go into calculating each.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Yes
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
I think the portions of the article talking about the history of the Handicap Systems may have been slightly overrepresented. Overall, the tone and balance of the article was good.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
The sources are current, most being from the years 2011-2020. Since the article explains different handicap systems around the world, there are many sources from golf associations and federations.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * Yes

Organization evaluation
The article is easy to navigate, including a list of contents that take the reader to the part they are looking for, and includes headings for each main topic talked about.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No
 * 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
The media in this article is equations showing how to calculate the handicaps in the sections they correspond to. This article also includes tables that the authors put in with information they found from cited articles.

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
Most of the conversations in the Talk page are those of adjusting terminology used in the article, correcting information that was put in, and suggesting parts of the article that should be explained further or removed entirely. This article is part of the WikiProject Golf, and is rated as a C-Class on the projects quality scale, and High-Importance on the projects importance scale.

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, I believe the article explains the calculations and history of golf handicaps well. I do think it could be improved by adding more citations to the equations given as well as the tables created, that way the reader can look into the citation for further information on the topic. I also think the article is well developed, having the ability to help the reader understand the topic, but there is still room for improvement that could help make this article better than it is.

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: