User:Maleka 06/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: (Brooke Gladstone)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. (The article don't have much on the author. This is a challenge for me to find more information on the author and her work.)

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

 * Yes. The does include a concise and clear introductory sentence.
 * The lead does include a brief description of her work.
 * No. Everything is presented in the article.
 * The is concise and not too wordy.

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

 * Yes, the article is related to Technology and Culture.
 * The content isn't very much up-to-date.
 * The article is missing some new content.
 * Yes, there's an equity gap. The article doesn't address historically underrepresented populations or topics.

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

 * Yes, the article is neutral.
 * No, there aren't any heavily biased claims in the article.
 * There view points which aren't presented at all.
 * The article is neutral. It don't persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

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

 * Yes, all the facts are backed by a reliable source of information.
 * Ye, the sources are thorough.
 * Yes, the sources are current. Not older than 2009.
 * Yes, the sources are written by authors from different spectrums.
 * Yes, all links work.

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

 * For the most part, yes the article is concise, clear and easy to read.
 * The article has no grammatical or spelling errors.
 * Yes, the article is well-organized with sections of major points.

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

 * The isn't any images beside that of the author.
 * Yes, the imaged is well-captioned.
 * Yes, all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Yes, the image is sized well and is 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?
 * 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

 * In the talk page the conversation is about modification of external links.
 * This article is part of Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.
 * We haven't yet talked about this author or this article in class. But in class we would discuss the authors argument, which is not discussed on Wikipedia.

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

 * The article looks good so far.
 * The articles strength is, it gives you all the information you need to know about Brooke Gladstone and her work.
 * The article can be improved with new information and citations.
 * The is pretty well-developed considering there isn't many authors with lots of information on the author.

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: