User:Peanutbutter29/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Feeder fish

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
It seems like an easy topic and It can teach me more about live feeding.

Evaluate the article
The article look good but i believe they need more information that not all fish aren’t good to use as feeder fish.

= Evaluate an Article Questions: common goldfish =

Lead:
A good lead section define defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

Questions about Lead:
1.     Does the lead include an introduction sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article’s topic? The lead has a good introduction about the common fish to use as feeders

2.    Does the lead include a brief description of the article’s major sections? Yes it gave us an intro about feeder fishes and their purpose

3.    Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn’t)

4.    Is the lead concise, or is it overly detailed? No.

Content:

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Questions about Content:
1.     Is the article’s content relevant to the topic? Yes fishes use as live feeding

2.    Is the content up to date? No it hasn’t been updated since 2013

3.    Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I don’t think so

4.    Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia‘s equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Tone and Balance:
Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Questions about Tone and Balance:
1.     Is the article neutral? Yes

2.    Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No

3.    Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented?No

4.    Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? Keeping feeder fish in a feeder tank

5.    Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Live feeding isnt an option.

Sources and References:
A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand when possible, this means academic and peer reviewed publications or scholarly books.

Questions about Sources and References:
1.     Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Sometimes they are backed up but at times they don’t have a source

2.    Are the sources thorough – i.e., do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes

3.    Are the sources current?yes

4.    Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Yes

5.    Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?yes

6.    Are there better sources available such as peer reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)no

7.     Check a few links. Do they work? Yes I think

Organization and Writing Quality
The writing should be clear and professional; the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

Questions for Organization and Writing Quality
1.     Is the article well written – i.e. is it concise, clear, and easy-to-read?yes

2.    Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?no

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

Images and Media:
1.     Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes

2.    Are images well captioned?yes

3.    Do all images adhere to Wikipedia ‘s copyright regulations?yes

4.    Are the images laid out in a visually-appealing way?yes

Talk Page Discussion:
The article’s Talk Page - and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there - can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn’t think of.

Questions for Talk Page Discussion:
1.     What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Good way to add and edit some of the sections

2.    How is the article rated? C class mid importance

3.    Is it a part of any wiki projects?no I don’t think so

Questions for Overall Impressions:
1.     What is the article ‘s overall status? Unknown

2.    What are the article’s strengths? Feeders in better than flake foos

3.    How can the article be improved?yes

4.    How would you assess the articles completeness – i.e. is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Not really

Examples of good feedback:
A good article evaluation can take a number of forms; the most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.