User:Martamae/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: (Equal Rights Amendment)
 * It is related to US History for my class and is a topic that is import to me.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Introductory sentence is very clear and describes the article well. The rest of the lead is confusing and overwhelming. It includes too many details. It does cover all of the major sections, but you can't tell what they are by just reading the lead.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The content is very relevant to the topic. Sometimes it goes into too much detail at some of the parts. It deals with women's rights. The content is also very up to date!


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

This article is very biased to be for this amendment and pro women's rights. It does talk about the opposition, but frames them in a bad light. It doesn't really persuade the reader to support it, but it is biased in its information.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

There are many sources for all of the information that has been recently updated as well. They are very thorough and provide extensive extra reading on the topic. Because of the number of sources there are many different authors and individuals from all different backgrounds. All the links seem to work.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The sections are very confusing and many don't have an introduction or explanation to the section. There doesn't seem to be a reason for the order of the sections and there are a lot of different ones that could be ordered better. It's hard to know the main points given the way the sections are broken up. The grammar isn't perfect, but isn't bad, and there aren't many spelling errors.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

Yes it contains good pictures and one map that helps explain. They could be laid out bigger and with better placement. Images have good captions and are cited.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There is talk about it being biased, but not much talk recently. It also wasn't is past tense a lot, but this seems to have been updated. It is a part of 7 wiki projects. We haven't talked about this topic yet in class, but I assume it has some information on it, but the most will not be covered in class,.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

I think overall the article is good, because it does have good cited information. I think it's weakness is the structure it is hard to follow and understand. It also has a slight bias. Some main clear points would help. It has sections that are complete and with more organization it could be more complete.


 * 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?

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: