User:Nn.exan./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: Carolyn M. Mazure
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it depicts the contributions a woman has made to the discipline of psychology and Dr. Mazure work focuses on gender.


 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The Lead does include and introductory sentence that describes the article.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead does not include a brief description of the articles major sections because it does not include the awards section.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content appears to be up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * No.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * 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?
 * No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * No, the research section of the article does not include any secondary sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes the sources are thorough and it does reflect the topic.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Some of the links do not work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is very concise.
 * 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?
 * Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * No.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The article is a part of the WikiProject Biography, so it is difficult for me to find the conversations about that specific article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated "start-class" in the WikiProject Biography, "start-class, low importance" in WikiProject Medicine/ Psychiatry, and "start-class" in WikiProject Psychology.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is good.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The strengths of the article is its neutral attitude and it is concise.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be improved by adding a citation in the research portion and including more information about Dr. Mazure's history and current research.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article is well-developed, but more work needs to be done. The last time the article was edited was February 2017 and could use more information regarding Dr. Mazure.

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: