User:MJVH2097/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. Colfax massacre
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

I evaluated the Colfax massacre. I chose to analyze this article because it was a prominent and bloody act of racial violence in the post-Civil War American South.


 * 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?: Very concise

Lead evaluation
Article is adequately concise and gives brief descriptions of its major sections.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?: Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?: Most sources and references published between 2000 and 2010.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?: No

Content evaluation
Content is relevant to topic and mostly contains sources written between the years 2000 and 2009.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?: Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?: No, not heavily.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?: Not really.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?: Article simply presents the facts. Although the facts naturally result in the reader developing their own opinions regarding the people and factions related to the topic, the article shows no signs of actively trying to lure the reader to develop one point of view over the other.

Tone and balance evaluation
Article does good job at staying neutral, especially for such as sensitive topic.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?: There are many points of information that are not cited at all.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?: Yes.
 * Are the sources current?: Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?: Link to PBS website worked but webpage was unavailable due to maintenance. Also, there was a link that led to a military report on the massacre, but I was not able to access it due to it being located on the Ancestry.com database.

Sources and references evaluation
There are many areas in this article which are not cited at all. The link to the PBS website worked but the information on the webpage was unavailable due to ongoing maintenance.

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?: None noticeable
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?: Yes

Organization evaluation
Topic was clear and concise. There were no noticeable spelling errors.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?: Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?: Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?: Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?: Yes

Images and media evaluation
Images successfully meet Wikipedia standards.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?: Conversations regard fact-checking and general tweaking of the article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?: Article was of interest to 3 WikiProjects. Was rated Start Class, Low Importance.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
Conversations regarded fact-checking and general article tweaking. Article was of interest to 3 WikiProjects. It was Rated Start Class, Low Importance.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?: Said to have multiple issues.
 * What are the article's strengths?: Background information.
 * How can the article be improved?: Citation of all sources
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?: Well developed accept that it lacks many citations.

Overall evaluation
Article has multiple issues. Although it did well in providing the reader with background information, it simply lacked proper citation in many areas.

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: