User:Mgondek20/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: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

Lowell Mill Girls


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content appears to be up to date, but the most recent references are from 2018, so would be reasonable to see if there are more recent sources.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I don't think there is any content that doesn't belong.
 * It would be helpful if the article addressed the end of the Lowell Mill Girls, for example, did mechanization lead to fewer jobs at some point.
 * The article has subheadings and a description of each underneath.
 * Some sections seem a little inconsistent. The introduction of the article makes it seem like an ideal job, meant to be like a "boarding school", but later sections address harsh working conditions, such as long hours, lack of air circulation and exposure to cotton dust.  Did some of this lead to health problems?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It covers the work of women and the addition of European immigrants from Ireland and French Canada. Were other groups discouraged or prevented from working there, such as Southern European immigrants or African Americans?  Also, why didn't men work there, was it because the women were paid less?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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: