User:Nmbiochem/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: Science Wars (link)
 * The title of the article drew my attention and I was intrigued to read through it.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

From the first sentence, it became known that the article is about grievances scientific realists and postmodernist critics had about the type of thinking done by each group. The specific contents of the article are not explicitly stated in the lead; however, it can be inferred that the historical background about each group, the critiques offered, and the impact of the science wars will be discussed.


 * 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 content is relevant to the topic and up-to-date. It was last edited on August 26 of this year. There does not seem to be any content that is missing or that does not belong because the article does a good job of describing the science wars from its birth to present day.


 * 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 does not appear to be heavily biased toward a particular position. All viewpoints have been equally represented, which allows the reader to develop his/her own opinions and ideas about the topic.


 * 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

All facts are backed by a source, especially sentences with direct quotations. The sources are thorough and current. They come from various publishers and authors which gives for a diverse scope of information. The links I clicked on do work.


 * 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

Yes, the article is well-written, easy to read, and without grammatical errors. The organization is easy to follow as it starts off very broad by giving historical context, then narrows down into present day.


 * 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 article does not have any images, so it is very text heavy.


 * 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 talk page has a lot of editing suggestions and is between several different users. The article has been rated C-class with mid-importance in the following three WikiProjects: History of Science, Sociology, and Skepticism. The article was once the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.


 * 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

The article has good content, but it lacks visuals. It is fairly complete in terms of content, but again, a few pictures can be added.


 * 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?