User:Mikgiffs/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.


 * Talk: Rolling in the Deep: Talk:Rolling in the Deep : Rolling in the Deep
 * I've chosen to evaluate this article because I really like music and Adele was at the top of the alphabetic ordered list.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? No
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? A little bit
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Kind of redundant

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? It appears to be.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Content that maybe doesn't need to reoccur as much as it does. The article uses a lot of the same points more than once.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Sure.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Harmless ones.
 * 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? Most.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Hmm..
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Yes! Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yup :)

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? I wouldn't say its bad but definitely could use some editing.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I noticed.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Pretty much.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned? Sure
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Not really, theres only two throughout the article. One at the top, one at the bottom and both are on the right hand side.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Mentions that the article is a bit redundant, and that perhaps a bit of a false claim was made in saying "becoming the first British artist.."
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? WikiProject Adele, WikiProject Songs, WikiProject R&B and Soul Music.
 * 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? C class
 * What are the article's strengths? The article contains a lot of facts about chart numbers.
 * How can the article be improved? Simple editing to remove redundancy and adding more background information. Usually fans are equally as interested in the reason the song was written as how well the song did in numbers. There's 1/4 of the information in background information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say the article is moderately developed, not shabby. :)

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: