User:Nickyeah/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: (China–Iran relations)
 * I like to check out international politics, which contains rich factors of communication in them. China and Iran have always constantly been on headlines on news in the US; thus I find the wiki about the relationship between these two nations.

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?
 * No, it does lay out only the history, but not the economic, political, etc...
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * No, the Lead basically said "here is a relationship between China and Iran" and nothing else.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it is all about CHINA-IRAN relationship
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, the content have covered to very latest things between the two.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Yes, the religion part is missing and many other parts are too short which causes confusion.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * No, it stated with stating China and Iran has a friendly relationship in the Lead which is to lead readers into some direction
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes, like the lead.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * Yes

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No, many are from news press like some local "Daily".
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * only some are
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes

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?
 * Yes, at few places
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, suctions in history, economics, etc..

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, I can click on to see it bigger

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Political conversations, international economics, history, anthropology, etc...
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is "unrated by Wiki"; No
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * This topic is addressed in a environment that China and Iran has a good relationship, which should not be because it should not lead the readers to any direction as we discussed in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I would give a C
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It provides a lot of aspects of the topic.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Fix the missing part, check the citation sources
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It is underdeveloped as a C.

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: