User:OliviaMOjeda/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: Object permanence
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. -I have always been interested in this subject

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The lead was very straightforward and clear. It also described the majority of the major sections and did not include any information that wasn't present in the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
The content is relevent, up-to-date, and there is no content that is missing or that does not belong.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? -yes
 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article is neutral and includes a lot of different views. I would not say one is more represented or in favor than another.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
All the facts seemed to be backed up properly, thorough, and all the links seem to work. I think the sources may benefit from being updated.

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? - a few
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? -Yes

Organization evaluation
The article was easy to read due to the clear organization and did not seem to have many grammatical or spelling errors.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
There is only one picture so there could definitely be more, but it is well-captioned, it adheres to the regulations, and it isn't laid out in an unappealing way.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
The article is rated as a Good Article and is part of WikiProject Psychology. It differs in the way it talks a lot about object permanence in animals.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
Overall, the article is very well done, it's strengths are that it is very clear and has a lot of the main information you should know about it. The article could be improved by finding more updated sources and by adding more images. I would assess the article's completeness as well-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: