User:Mteli/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: (Disinfection by-product)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I found the Wiki Project "Sanitation" and found this was a "Start" level of quality. It is also a topic discussed often between myself and my peers.

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
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It's pretty concise, I think it could add a bit more of a summary

Lead evaluation
The very thought-out articles I have seen use the Lead as a summary or introduction to the topic. I think more could be added to help the reader decide if they would like to continue to read the entire article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * No, the most recent source is from 2011. Since then there has definitely been information released on the topic.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I think adding images to show processes in which the DBPs are released would be useful, in addition to the written out chemical reactions that cause their formation. There has also been research done in the last decade on possible removal techniques of DBPs, which would be useful to add to the article.

Content evaluation
Although all the information in the article is useful, and seemingly accurate, there is a lot of room to include what else we know about DBPs, specifically information from the last decade.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, the article has a neutral tone.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Not particularly
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No

Tone and balance evaluation
Tone and balance is quite neutral. No issues that I can see.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes, sometimes more than 1. Although the first source is cited a lot more than the others. Many of them are articles published in well known journals.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * All the sources are good, accurate sources of information, but more sources could be added to include more information on each topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The oldest is from 1980, but other are from 2011 latest. More recent sources should be added.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All but the link ""Directive 83". 3 November 1998. on the quality of water intended for human consumption" worked.

Sources and references evaluation
More sources could be included to reflect more recent information.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes
 * 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, i think more could be added though

Organization evaluation
Well organized.

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

Images and media evaluation
Adding images would better enhance understanding and real-world examples of this topic.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * People are discussing going though the WHO's reports in more detail as well as interpretation of the source results. They are also discussing adding removal techniques and careful use of nomenclature.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is part of the WikiProject Sanitation, and is rated "Start-Class"
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Unfortunately we haven't discussed this topic in class - I didn't realize we had to choose one related.

Talk page evaluation
I think the community is talking about the right things, but there has been little improvement since the discussions have occured.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It has made a good start with accurate sources and facts but has a lot of room for improvement.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Articles are good sources and several relevent topics are covered.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The mentioned topics need to explained more in depth or examples should be added. Images should also be included, in addition to more recent sources and more recent information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is 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: