User:Mulhearno1/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) Nama people
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article to evaluate because the information provided doesn't have a general source and there is gaps with in the page.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead includes a good start to who the Nama people are and where they are located at. The article only has the table of contents as the articles description of what it will be talking about. The Lead doesn't include information that isn't present in the article. The lead is short and concise, the only thing that is missing is that the Lead doesn't talk about what exactly the article will talk about on the Nama people.


 * 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

The article's content is relevant to the topic since it does talk about the Nama people. The content is up to date, it looks as if the page was made last year. Since the article is fairly new there is a lot of content to be added. This article does not deal with Wikipedia's equity gaps nor does this topic relate to historically underrepresented populations, the Nama people are a very large group in Africa.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article is neutral and there doesn't seem to be any claims that are heavily biased. There isn't a lot of information that s presented in the Culture part of the article. There is a lot of information under the History part but may not be particularly creditable. The article does not persuade the reader, it gives blank facts without opinions.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

The facts in this article are backed are by sources but they are not reliable because the citations are incorrect. Some of the sources are reliable because they come from Academic journals and textbooks. The sources don't have a lot of in depth information, but did provide a lot about the history of the Nama people. The sources are all recently published that range from early 2000 to now. The sources are published by a range of authors, there aren't historical marginalized people listed. Most of the links do work, but there are two that say the information no longer exists. Most of the websites are websites that don't hold a lot of authority, but there are a few textbooks cited.


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

This article is sorta well written, it does have a lot of broad topics that need to be sorta out and better explained. For the information that is there is it written well and easy to read. There are a few grammatical errors, I don't see any spelling errors. The article is well-organized for what information is there. The sections that they are broken down into are reasonable and well thought out.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

The images in the article are good and do adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations, but I think there could be better ones added into the article that goes better along with the information. The images are well captions, but I don't think the images are laid out in a very appealing way and there are images repeated on the same topic in the article.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The conversations going on behind the scenes are talking about the bibliography and another person fixed the citations for the article. This article is rated Start-Class and is a part of five different Wikiprojects. Someone also updates information in the Talk Page updating on the African Government but states doesn't have enough information to write about it.


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

Overall this articles status is decent, the articles strengths are the information about the history, but it needs to improve on the information provided about the culture. It also needs to be improved on the cites used for the information. I would assess the articles completion by adding to the Culture sections adding more sections and more in depth information about the sections that are already provided. This article is definitely underdeveloped and has room for improvement.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly 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: