User:Nickgoldthorpe/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.


 * 1) Name of article: Talk:Aztec mythology
 * 2) Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. It seemed intriguing and wanted to know more about the topic.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 1) Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it does describe what the articles topic is about and associated with.
 * 2) Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, doesn't  go over the Pantheon and doesn't definitively saying anything about the Creation Myth other then they descended from people from the north.
 * 3) Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, it goes over what is included in lead information.
 * 4) Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 1) Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, it all correlates.
 * 2) Is the content up-to-date? To the best of my understanding of the topic, yes.
 * 3) Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, could maybe go more in depth.

Content evaluation
I believe this article is concise but maybe could be more expanded on how the myths relate with one another, but if your just looking for the general information yeah.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 1) Is the article neutral? Yes
 * 2) Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, just gives general information about the topic.
 * 3) Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Could correlate the myths more, underrepresented.
 * 4) Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it is just factual with information, trying to inform not persuade.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 1) Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes
 * 2) Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes
 * 3) Are the sources current? No, the most recent dates back to 2013. Most are from the 1970s and 80s.
 * 4) Check a few links. Do they work? Out of 3, one did.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 1) Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? With the limited information yes.
 * 2) Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? None that were noticeable.
 * 3) 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


 * 1) Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, but they are all of the same variety.
 * 2) Are images well-captioned? Yes
 * 3) Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes
 * 4) Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 1) What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? They way the Aztecs viewed theyre gods as rather a "energy" then actual human like being.
 * 2) How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes, it is art of three Wikiproject Mexico, Wikiproject Mythology, and Wikiproject Mesoamerica/ Aztec.
 * 3) How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This is a random article.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 1) What is the article's overall status? I would say a work in progress.
 * 2) What are the article's strengths? Basic infromation of the topic.
 * 3) How can the article be improved? More in depth on the correlation between mythology and the Aztec civilization.
 * 4) How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped

Optional activity

 * 1) 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: