User:Moringa0613/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: Ellen Prince
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I was interested in seeing how well-documented women in the linguistics/pragmatics field were.

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, somewhat. There are very few sections present, but their information is included in the lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, the first line includes information about how Prince was only able to celebrate 16 out of 66 birthdays, and the topic is not touched on beyond that.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes; the last edit was Feb. 1 2020.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The content that is present is relevant for the most part.

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. The article is very straight-forward in presenting facts.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes; many come from database articles or academic institutions.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Somewhat. A few are very brief in content, though, and with the amount of publications she has made, it seems odd that her page is so brief.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, they are fairly current. The oldest seems to be from 2010.
 * 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, it is concise and easy to follow.
 * 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? No images are present.
 * 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? There are very few conversations occurring. Only one question regarding cause of death, and two relating to the fact that her publications list is very short, and there could be more sections included in total.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated 'Start-Class' and part of two WikiProjects; WikiProject Women, and WikiProject Biography.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Wiki is very brief and focuses more on the technical aspects of the page itself, rather than the actual content.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths? It gives a good, clear and brief overview as to who Prince was and what she did in general.
 * How can the article be improved? More specific information regarding her publications and work would be helpful, and there could be more sections included in general.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped.

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: