User:Mooreilly/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: Praxeology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. The subject interests me because it has to do with how humans purposefully do things rather than just unintentionally.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it gives a definition of what the term means.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, it is a very brief description noting each section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, everything that is presented is explained throughout article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, it explains how and when the term was first discovered and in what ways it has been used throughout history.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Looking through the edit history, there have been multiple revisions this year alone.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The article could include more about its affect on Poland. Otherwise I do not see anything is missing or put in the article when it shouldn't be.

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? Yes, the viewpoint on Austrias economics gets a full section which doest seem to make the article flow.
 * 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, the article uses many references throughout the article.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Some of them but not all.
 * 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? For the most part. Some areas could be transferred into bullet points rather than sentences.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Some grammatical, but did not notice any spelling errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Could be broken down a little bit better with regards to the first section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned? N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? A few conversations that are being said: about the subjectivity of previous edits, if it is considered a science, and the longest conversation involves what Praxeology is.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Rated start class. It is part of the following WikiProjects: Philosophy, Economics, Libertarianism, and Sociology.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article has room for improvement, seems like it could be organized better.
 * What are the article's strengths? It holds many good facts and has the sources to back them up.
 * How can the article be improved? Organization of sections
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Being unfamiliar with the subject I am unsure, but if I were to guess, this article probably has some facts that could be included.

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: