User:OwlFall2019/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: Tom Boellstorff
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I wanted to choose someone we haven't discussed yet, as well as a page that needed some help

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes. The lead clearly states that this article is about Tom Boellstorff and gives a brief description of his work as an anthropologist and other topics he has focused on.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Nothing except for a list of the sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Nope, everything in the lead appears in the article
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead in this article does a good job of introducing Tom, but could be longer and include a bit about him and not just what he has studied.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it's about Tom's life, work, and publications.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * No, the last career update was in 2016, even though the last edit was on 9/2/19. It was just a formatting edit, not information based. The list of publications was last edited earlier this year with a link, but no information was added since 2018.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * All of the headers have content and the basic information is there.

Content evaluation
The content of the article could be more expanded on each point. Everything is concise, but too concise in a way. It's like the facts are just being listen in a paragraph with no explanation.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, they are straight forward about his life and work.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There are only two sections (career and biography), which appear to almost have a good split between the page.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of the article is neutral and not biased in my opinion. It clearly just explains his life and work.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * There are no citations at all.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * n/a
 * Are the sources current?
 * n/a
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links to other pages work, but there is one in the internal links section that doesn't work.

Sources and references evaluation
The article needs a major citation edit. There are currently no citations and a few broken links, which can show that this article may not be accurate.

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?
 * Not that I can spot.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * It's seems as if the paragraphs are just listing facts.

Organization evaluation
The organization of the article is easy to follow and clear. The style of the writing however, seems choppy. It reads as if the paragraphs are listing facts instead of explaining the,. There's no flow.

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

Images and media evaluation
There are no images on this page, which could be added as a good edit.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are no conversations on the page.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Stub-class rating in the biography portal and LGBT portal.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia states that this article is very incomplete and nothing more than a simple dictionary entry. It goes more in-depth on the ratings scale, something I didn't know existed, and shows how the article could be improved.

Talk page evaluation
There are no conversations on the talk page yet. In terms of rating, this article is rated stub-class for both of the projects it's apart of, LGBT studies and Biography.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * In need of a lot of work.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * All of the current information is clear and concise.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Citations need to be added and images as well.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It's moderately developed. Things need more explanation and citations.

Overall evaluation
The article is organized well and is clear / concise. Even though it's information seems legit, there are no citations at all, which makes it appear as inaccurate. Adding citations would be a huge positive edit. The article also needs images and more development of the main facts.

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: