User:Mschott1/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) Women in science
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. The class is on women in science. I believe a good starting point is to examine the broad topic before diving into specifics.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The article clearly describes the topic, gives an extensive table of contents, was concise and did not present information not discussed in the body.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No in fact the article includes examples from around the world as to avoid the Euro-centrism that so often plagues this topic.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? Yes.

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? One could argue that the viewpoint of men is underrepresented in this article but that seems to be thin ice.
 * 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
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * Are the sources current? Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
 * 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 as broad a topic as it is, yes it was concise
 * 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? Some but few
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? I guess.

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 many about the structure and many more about what women to include in this brief history, some about a POV, and other edits on sources.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is a party of WikiProjects and is rated B Class
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This has much more detail than what we have discussed in class. It gives a brief history of women from around the world as opposed to women in Europe and America as we have discussed in class. It also talks more extensively about fields like physics and chemistry as opposed to the botany we have been discussing in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? This question was a bit confusing but I would say good..?
 * What are the article's strengths? Through yet not boring.
 * How can the article be improved? There was a lot of discussion in the chat about sources. Some of those could have been a bit more recent.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? 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: