User:Mgrone/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: Kekla Magoon
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I choose to evaluate Magoon's article because I've read her book Shadows of Sherwood and really enjoyed it. I wanted to learn more about her as an author so I could appreciate her work more and know the purpose for why she wrote what she did.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it is a short, reasonable introduciton.
 * 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? No, all information included is in article as well.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise- does not overly share; leaves more detailed work to later in article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, all content focuses on her biographically or her works and awards.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes, awards and works published through 2019 are included.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, all content makes sense and should be included.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, the article is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, all positions are informational and non-judgmental.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, this article only discusses Magoon's biography and works. No viewpoint is overrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? This article discusses Magoon's biography and works, so it is not in favor of position over another.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all facts have sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, sources are thorough and include articles, blog posts, and interviews.
 * Are the sources current? Sources are current and range in dates.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? All links I checked worked.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is concise, clear, and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I did not notice any grammar or spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The article is extremely well-organized and easy to navigate.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? There are no images included in this page. It could be helpful to have images, including those of the author and/or of published work, included to help readers identify with her and her works.
 * Are images well-captioned? There are no captions because there are no images.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There are no images.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? There are no images.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? The page was created in April 2019. There have been several edits, but conversations only explain edits. No conversations or edits have happened since September 16, 2019. There have been 8 users who have contributed to the article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article is not rated and does not appear to be a part of any WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? No, the way Wikipedia discusses the topic is the same as the way we've discussed it in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article's status is still being edited, but it has all of the key parts to be a quality article.
 * What are the article's strengths? The article does a great job introducing some of Magoon's major works and giving readers a scope of her overall works.
 * How can the article be improved? This article could use images to enhance the reader's understanding of Magoon and some of her works.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I assessed the article's completeness by evaluating the cohesiveness of each section and how much information each section contained. There was a good amount, but not overwhelming, amount of information, and this is a good baseline for readers who may not know who Magoon is to learn some basic information about her or find more of her books.

Overall evaluation
This article is a good introduction to Magoon and her works.

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: