User:Mingzu Zhang/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: History of communication
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. This article is relevant to my course and worthy to be read.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * 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.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? No. Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * 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.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Some of the sources are current, some are not.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Yes. Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There conversations of how to improve the article, such as suggestions like restructuring the timeline and providing more details about a certain parts.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article has been listed as a level-4 vital article in History. This article has been rated as Start-Class. This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We didn't talk too much about this topic in class. The way Wikipedia discusses it is more precise.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? This is an article which talks about the history of communication according to the timeline.
 * What are the article's strengths? This article' Lead and structure is clear, language is concise and precise. It has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. It also has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.


 * How can the article be improved? The article can be improved by restructuring chronologically.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? In my opinion, this article is well-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: