User:Mjgardner2/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: Tie signs
 * Tie signs are something that everyone notices and acknowledges. But, before now I did not realize that there was an actual term for it or that research existed for this subject.

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? No.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the content covers various aspects of Tie Signs and the progression of research into this topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes. The Original research began in the 1950s but has been backed up and supported by articles as recent as 2010.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There does not seem to be any content that does not belong but the sections are rather short and seem like more information could be added or expanded upon.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? This article and topic is not one that holds strong opinions so I would consider the article to be neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? All of the claims seem to be free of biased thinking.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The article did not indicate that any research has been done on homosexual relationships so that viewpoint is highly underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Because tie signs are such common occurrence the article does not try to persuade you in a certain direction. The article serves more to support such a common occurrence with actual research and explain it more in-depth.

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. This topic is not highly researched but what is published is included.
 * Are the sources current? As current as 2010.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, the links appear to work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? The article is very easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I did not notice any errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, the article is broken down by the different angles of research done on this topic.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, each image has a good explanation about the purpose of the picture.
 * 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? The discussion focused a lot on how to represent the research done on platonic friendships.
 * 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? We haven't talked about this in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Overall the article seemed to be fairly solid.
 * What are the article's strengths? It does a good job of giving real life examples to explain the subject.
 * How can the article be improved? I think more information can be added.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that it is well-developed but could still use some work.

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: