User:NGalvanMU/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: Block 10
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I was looking under the Medical Ethics page because that was something that interests me and there was a subcategory Nazi human subject research and under that subcategory was this page.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, but this article clearly lack information and doesn't have enough sources for its information.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes. The majority of the information is in the Lead.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is overly detailed. Some of the information should be transferred and elaborated on in the article sections.

Lead evaluation
4/10. The Lead is a good foundation for this article. However, it lacks information, has too many small details that would better fit in the content section of the article, and doesn't have enough citations for the information that it does have. But, it's a good start.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, but there is hardly any information.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * No.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes, I feel that there is a lot of information missing from this article.

Content evaluation
1/10 The content section has little to no information about the article subject. There is hardly anything to even evaluate. Clearly, it needs a lot of work done.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * "To please the “elite” prisoners, the Germans would house prostitutes in Block 10." I feel this senate is the most biased sentence in the article. I don't think intentions should be assumed unless there is documentation of such that can be referenced.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * I think just the whole subject of Block 10 is underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Tone and balance evaluation
4/10. At least the information that is present in the article is not very biased and does a decent job of maintaining neutrality.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No
 * Are the sources current?
 * No
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

Sources and references evaluation
2/10. There are 2 sources/references for this article. But, all the links do work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * No. It is easy to read but is much to choppy and short.
 * 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?
 * No. There is more information in the Lead than there is in the content section. And there is only one section other than the Lead.

Organization evaluation
1/10. There seems to be no attempt at organization.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * Yes

Images and media evaluation
9/10. The medial is correctly sourced and is neatly place so it is appealing to the eye. The images are about and support he understanding of the article.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * This page was created in December 2019. So there isn't a whole lot of talk since it is such a new page but there is just conversations explain edits.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is not part of any WikiPorjects and is rated as a START
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We never talked about this in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is a Start.
 * What are the article's strengths? Although it is a start is has plenty of editors interested in making the page better.
 * How can the article be improved? Just needs a LOT more information and reputable references.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Not complete at all. It is very underdeveloped but not poorly developed. It has a lot of potential.

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: