User:MRS4H9/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: Casting
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article to evaluate because the history section is very lacking. Plus there is a content gap about the types of castings.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Very clear and concise lead.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, many of the major sections are not mentioned in the articles lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes, it talks about uses and industries that is not mentioned later in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is slightly too detailed. Some of the information presented in the Lead goes very indepth.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * All content currently appears to be relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * the content is up to date. there is a mixture of old and new citations to keep the article relevant.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The content about fettling seems strange under its current header. The appears to be loads of content missing for the history and types section.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, all writing appears to be unbiased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The history viewpoint is very underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * There is no persuading towards one position or another.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Most of the facts are backed up by sources. Other sections have very little citations so the information may not be the most reliable.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes the sources reflect the available literature.
 * Are the sources current?
 * There is a mix of old and newer publications.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes the links work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * It is easy to read but some sections are confusing.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not detect any spelling or grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It is broken down into sections but it appears that some sections are missing information.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Images to enhance the information presented in the article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Image captions are okay, more details could be nice.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * They adhere to copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images are visually appealing.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * They are talking about the arrangement of the article and adding more sections to the types.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * WikiProject Metalworking
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Not applicable.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * C-Class with High Importance
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Good Lead and sources.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * More information on history and types.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article appears under and poorly developed.

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: