User:MisterGrumpy/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: Biblical archaeology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. The topic appealed to me.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it sets up the rest of the article and informs the readers of what points the article plans to make.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, it introduces what topics will be covered within this article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, everything mentioned in the lead is talked about in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, it goes into detail of the history.
 * Is the content up-to-date? It is somewhat up to date, the last update to the talk page was from 2018.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Everything seems relevant to the topic at hand.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, its informative without being biased or one-sided.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, the points appear neutral.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Not many view points, it is a neutral, informative article.
 * 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? Unable to find out, links do not work.
 * Are the sources current? Unable to find out, links do not work.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? The links do not work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, not messy at all, easy to follow.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? There are no grammatical/spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, in fact, many sub-sections to keep from digressing in the wrong section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? It includes images but only a few help the understanding of the topic at hand.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, they give information of what the images are/mean.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, it gives the information of where they got the picture from.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, they are not disrupting the flow of information whatsoever.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Conversations on whether some of the info is credible or not.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated C-Class, and it is part of the wikiproject.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Wikipedia talks are way more in-depth than the brief summaries in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is flagged, but still debated on.
 * What are the article's strengths? It goes in detail of the different topics at hand, and appears to give plenty of information and citing.
 * How can the article be improved? Perhaps by also giving more of an explanation so that non-religious readers could understand.
 * 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: