User:Paola.vega12/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) Doctor
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because I aspire to be a Doctor and I was curious of what it shows when you search for it on the internet.



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
This article does not have a introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic, it just give a lot of possible topics that you are searching for or every single thing that contains that word that you look up for like songs, films, etc.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
For the topic that I searched for, honestly I was thinking that it would be a lot more of information and it would be more specific for the fact that "doctor" is something everyone knows and this topic has a lot to share. I think this article is missing a lot of information.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
If you look the article just in the way it is, you can say is a neutral article and that it is coherent. If you look the article as I do, that it is missing a lot of information, you can tell that it is not that neutral for the fact that it is "incomplete".

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?
 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
This article does not really have a lot of "references" that you can look up to, for the fact that it is very brief, so we don't really have that sources that we can look up to for information in this specific article. But it does have another "pages" that you can search for the topics that they gave you as examples in the article.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
It is well organized with the poor information that the article has, and it it clear and easy to read and understand what it is in the article, but possibly you won't find what you are searching for in the article.

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
This article does not have any type of images. It was very rare for the fact that for this topic you can literally put any type of image that is involved with medicine just to make it more interesting, fun, or complete.

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
This article differs a lot with what we are used to think it to be for the fact that we recognized this topics: like medicine, doctor, etc, like it is a lot of information and a lot of reading. Honestly I was so impressed when I looked up this topic and I saw this little information in the article of this specific topic.

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
This article can be useful just if you are looking very general of what the word "Doctor" is in some songs, films, etc., but it is not that useful if you are looking for extra information or more specific topics.

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: