User:Meg Domo/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: Julie Cruikshank
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Cruikshank has made notable contributions to the study of Indigenous peoples of the Yukon but, has very little information written about her.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The lead includes a concise introductory sentence. It briefly touches on her works and her employment history. However, it does not mention her achievements and awards. The article itself does not mention her employment as a professor or her education. The lead is concise.


 * 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
Lead is well written and concise. A few minor changes may be needed.

Content

 * Guiding questions

Content is relevant and up-to-date. There should be inclusion of past education and employment as a professor. Discussion of her published works should be included. Discussion of "Life Lived Like a Story" should include pictures of Annie Ned, Angela Sidney, and Kitty Smith if possible. Inclusion of a picture of Cruikshank should be included as well.


 * 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?

Content evaluation
Content is not complete. Further research is needed.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is neutral.


 * 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
Tone and balance are neutral.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Some citations are need to be updated/included/removed. Links to Annie Ned and Kitty Smith do not exist.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Some attention needed.

Organization

 * Guiding questions

Article is well-written and easy to read. Major points are in sections however, there needs to be more information so that the article can be better organized.


 * 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
Organization is well done.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

No images.


 * 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
Images needed.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

No conversations.


 * 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
Nothing to evaluate.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

This article needs additional citations for verification. The article's strengths are its awards and achievements portion. The article can be improved by expanding on Cruikshank's publications and the addition of images. This article is underdeveloped.


 * 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
This article is underdeveloped and needs more information added.

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: