User:Nosburg/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: (link) - Afro-Paraguayans
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. - It seemed somewhat interesting and it needs some help.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? - Not really
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? - No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? - No
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Very Concise, almost too short

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? - yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? - from what I can tell yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? - nothing that stand out to me at the moment
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? - yes very much

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? - yes it is
 * 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? - I am not sure as all but one source is in Spanish and the one that is not in Spanish you need login credentials to view
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? - again I can not view the sources
 * Are the sources current? - from what I can tell the sources seem to be about 10 years old
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Again I cannot read any of the sources
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes the links work, but one of them you need login credentials, the others are in Spanish.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Parts of it seem a little choppy
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? nothing that sticks out at me
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? not really, especially the last part, the year of African Descent just seems like an afterthought

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? - not much just people saying what revisions they have made
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? - it is rated as a stub and it is apart of two wikiprojects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? - I don't understand this question

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? - it's very much a work in progress
 * What are the article's strengths? - It has a big demography section
 * How can the article be improved? Adding more sources
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? - definitely under developed

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: