User:Martinmadison/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: Rail transport in Hong Kong
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Hong Kong has one of the most advanced transportation system. Its major backbone, MTR is one of the few metro transit system that makes profits.
 * The articles provide a decent structure and yet more details can be added to provide a whole picture of MTR.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * Financial strategy of MTR and how it makes profit


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, it clearly introduced the Railway transit system in Hong Kong including MTR and other oeprating systems.
 * 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?
 * Everything in Lead has been explained below. More details could be added to subsections.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, it included some of the latest events and impacts on the subject.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Some details are missing on MTR profit strategy part.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It doesn't have this issue.

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?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, all sources are backed either by academic articles or government public information. MTR provides neutral information and data mostly in investor relations section.
 * 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, the history section provide great details based on academic research and entity public information
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

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?
 * Not seen any
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, however, the order of some section could be changed for a smooth reading experience.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, including pictures and MTR map
 * 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. But it can be arranged in a more compact way. Current layout is a bit spreaded out.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Little conversations. Some suggesting adding the details of bridge, tunnl. Some suggesting adding the details about the implementation of AI in Transit system
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Star class, high and it's part of the WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Including multiple perspectives such as history, progress and other details.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Decent structure, some details can be added for future improvement.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Still, more details required
 * How can the article be improved?
 * more details to solidate the articles
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Underdeveloped

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: