User:Mprakes19/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) Medullary sponge kidney
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? >> Yes, the Lead includes and introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the articles topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? >> Yes, the Lead includes a brief description of the articles major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? >> No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? >> The Lead is concise and clear, yet not overly detailed.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? >> Yes, the article's content is relevant to the topic of Medullary sponge kidney.
 * Is the content up-to-date? >> Yes, the page was last edited in December of 2019
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? >> All the content in the article is relevant to the subject being talked about. Although, there could be more information explaining the content in further detail.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? >> Yes, the article is neutral because it neither sympathizes nor disparages the content.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? >> No, there are no biased claims.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? >> From the content available, there are no viewpoints that are over represented or underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? >> This article is mainly an informative article, so the article is not attempting to persuade the reader, it is mostly trying to inform the reader about health risks.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? >> All the facts in the article are backed up by reliable secondary sources of information.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? >> Yes.
 * Are the sources current? >> Most of the sources are a few years old but are reliable.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? >> A few of the links do not work, or can no longer be found, while others do work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? >> The article was very concise, clear, and easy to understand.
 * 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? >> The article was organized into different sections explaining the points for each.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? >> Although there was only one image, the one used enhanced an understanding of what topic the article was trying to discuss.
 * Are images well-captioned? >> No.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? >> Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? >> Yes. However, a few more should have been used in another section of discussion.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? >> On the talk page, most of what was being talked about was modifying external links.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? >> It has been rated as a C-class article and is within scope of WikiProject Medicine.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? >> The topic is mainly discussed adding in editing and modifications instead of an actual discussion on the topic in depth.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? >> The article was rated as 'Low-importance' on the project's importance scale.
 * What are the article's strengths? >> It is intended for a general audience and the information is consistent.
 * How can the article be improved? >> Providing a few more details on the topic.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? >> The article is well-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: