User:Mollyanne99/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: (link)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * LENA Foundation: LENA Foundation
 * I choose this article because the research lab where I am a research assistant uses LENA recording devices on our home visits with 6 month old babies. I saw the LENA mentioned in the Wiki C-Class page, and it caught my attention

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * No, "close opportunity gaps" is very vague
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, it seems biased
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise, but it doesn't seem to explain well exactly what a LENA device is or does. It could use some revising.

Lead evaluation
Needs revision, good length

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Most of it seems to be, content has been updated recently
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * what seems to be missing is citations for the "research findings" section
 * I also think that the "scientific background" could definitely be longer

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * it seems to be, this is mostly an explanation of this software and company
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * it definitely seems like the LENA foundation does advocate, specifically for its own product and research, but the Wiki article itself doesn't seem to be biased
 * 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?
 * the article doesn't, but the LENA foundation does

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No, I don't think the "research findings" section has enough cited sources
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes, they seem to
 * Are the sources current?
 * The ones that I looked at are; they seem to range from historical literature on this topic to more recent findings
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * the ones that I checked do

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * yes, it isn't trying to be too scientific or convoluted
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * it seems to be alright
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, very well-organized, clear and interesting

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * yes, but I think the images could be bigger
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes, very well
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * as far as I can tell?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * they could be bigger, but I do like how the page isn't clutter with a ton of diagrams or scientific images - it isn't trying to be a research article but just a layman's explanation of a foundation and its product

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 doesn't seem to be any conversations going on around this page - the only points on the page seem to be made by a wiki cyber-bot
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * it is rated C-class Of Low Importance in the Linguistics/applied Linguistics and Autism projects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Since this page is more about a foundation and a product that support a theory, I think it should be evaluated differently than a page simply on a topic of linguistics. There could be more in this page pertaining to the different areas of linguistics that the LENA and its products explore

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * this article seems to be in progress, but definitely unfinished, specifically in terms of the research and findings section
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * the article seems to present a foundation and product in an unbiased and clear way - it is easy to understand
 * How can the article be improved?
 * more sources could be added, and in general more information could be presented
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is definitely underdeveloped in that it isn't finished or complete

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: