User:NicholasSawyer/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: Grassland
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * This topic is a relatively general topic that a lot of people could search to find information. It is also very high priority for a couple WikiProjects so it should be improved upon since it is currently a C-Class article.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The Lead is concise but the last sentence of the lead is a bit confusing and unnecessary.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
The subsection titled "Types of grassland" is very disjointed and seems like the information was just thrown in with no attention to presentation or relevance. Also the Ecoregions subsection with a bunch of tables is a mess and does not seem to relay add to the of importance to the article. The "Biodiversity" and "Animals" subsections should be merged

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is overall pretty neutral and doesn't try to persuade the reader in any way.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
There are large sections that have no citations at all which are marked with the "This section does not cite any sources" tag. There is definitely a whole lot more research on grass lands that is not represent in this article. Half of the links do not work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article is very bad. sections seems like there were added haphazardly. The article is tagged as possibly needing to be reorganized to comply worth Wikipedia's layout guidelines.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
The images are all relevant photographs of grassland landscapes. All are captioned with their location and some with the type of grassland shown. Images are pretty much all taken by those who added them to the article so copyright regulations were followed. The images are not well laid out.

Checking the talk page



 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
This is a C-Class article that is a part of the plants, ecology and geography WikiProjects. There is not a lot of discussion on this article outside of taking about disorganized content and citations.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
The article overall needs to be reorganized and a lot of the content needs to be combined and fleshed out with citations.

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: