User:Mehnazt/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: The Maine
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have chosen this article because this is the Wikipedia page of my favorite band growing up. I have quite a bit of background knowledge regarding this band so I thought I would more accurately be able to evaluate an article about them.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes, it does. It explains that the page is about an American rock band. It also includes the band's origin, date of formation and band member names.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

It does. The article is small because the band isn'tÂ extremelyfamous. So the band's discography is mainly elaborated in most of the article. The discography is briefly stated in the lead as well.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

It doesn't.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

It is concise in describing the article.

Lead evaluation
This article's lead is a good lead. It touches on almost all topics mentioned in the article. It is as concise as can be.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

All content was relevant content.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

Yes, The Maine released an album recently and that is mentioned in the article. This shows that the editors of the page keep track of the band's releases and general activities.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

I didn't find content that didn't belong. However, the article itself is so short. This band was many side-projects, a special record label, special events for fans etc.The fact that the band's discography information dominates the article shows that many other activities of the band are left out.

Content evaluation
Editors presented content the right way but the content is very minimal.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?

Yes. I have been to many fangirl pages and many hate pages of this band, so I can distinguish extremely positive/negative language. This article is neutral.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No. I couldn't find any such claim.


 * 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.

Tone and balance evaluation
The article was more factual than subjective/persuasive. So, there wasn't much scope for bias or an imbalance of tone.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

This is a page about a musical group, so peer-reviewed research articles or scholarly book are not options for sources. However, the sources mentioned are reliable sources for news on rock-bands.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

There are 32 citations for a rather short article. They are also from a variety of sources. So, to some extent they reflect the information available on the band. However, more information regarding their current activities should be available, and hence more citations should be made to current material. This will allow for coverage of all information available on the topic.


 * Are the sources current?

As I've mentioned, the content gap needs to be fixed first. This will allow for more current information and citations.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

They work. But some of them have been updated/are constantly being updated, so they do not have the information mentioned in the article anymore.

Sources and references evaluation
Any problems with references has to do with lack of content. If more content is added, more diverse/new citations can be given.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

It is concise and clear.


 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

No it doesn't.


 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

It is well organized given the topics that were included.

Organization evaluation
The organization is good given the topic that were included.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

It doesn't include many images of the band. It could include more images about the band and maybe some pictures of their albums/tours.


 * Are images well-captioned?

The captions of the images that are present are not incorrect.


 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

They do. The two images present have the license of CC BY-SA.


 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

If more pictures were present, I could judge the visually appealing aspect. The pictures are too sparse for the article to be visually appealing. Also, the main picture at the very top could be more clear, showing the faces of all the band members (current picture is awkward).

Images and media evaluation
The pictures in the article currently adhere to Wikipedia guidelines. However, they are few in number and could be changed to better quality photos. Both the pictures used are really old, as well.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are goiThe following portion from the talk page shows that this article is part of a few Wikiprojects relating to music and the state Arizona (the band's home town). The article is rated badly across all categories, unfortunately.c?

There are some arguments about the band's genre. Ther


 * the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

We haven't talked about this in class...

Talk page evaluation The talk page is inactive. The article is rated poorly. The talk page needs to be more active if the quality of the article is to improve and higher ratings are to be generated.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * This is an article that could use a lot of improvement in many areas.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is concise and organized.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Its content needs to cover a broader range of activities by this band. The editors of the page have to be more active and more pictures need to be added.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is incomplete because there is a large content gap.

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:Talk:The Maine (band)