User:Pv2020/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: Digital Rhetoric
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: It reflects the topic of my course.

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? Fairly concise.

Lead evaluation
Lead section seems to be concise, informative, and straightforward. It reflects the information that is presented in the rest of 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
Content seems to be up-to-date and generally relevant to the topic of digital rhetoric. The article's numerous topics are each related to digital rhetoric, some more closely than others. No content seems to be missing.

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
I believe that this article is neutral. It does not appear to have a strong bias towards any particular position on digital rhetoric. However, in some sections of the article (like each section under Controversies) there are arguably too many broad statements without cited references. This could be considered a type of bias.

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
Many facts in this article are not backed up by a reliable secondary source. By looking at the sources that are cited in this article, it appears that they are up-to-date (most of them were published within the last decade).

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
Yes, this article is well-written with few grammatical or spelling errors. It is also well-organized and follows a clear table of contents.

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 only has one image, captioned "A student using technology in the classroom". It does not add anything to this article or help readers to understand the topic better.

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 Talk pages mainly contains sections that were previously in this article but have now been removed for lack of relevance or proper sources. The article is part of numerous WikiProjects and appears to be rated 'Start-class' in each of them. The conversation on this Talk page appears to uphold the Wikipedia guidelines that we learned about. People are being cordial and discussing their thoughts with other editors before making changes.

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
I am unable to identify a general status for this article. This article has many strengths: it is detailed, thorough, well-organized, and well-written. However, it needs more sources and references. For that reason, I would consider this article to be incomplete.

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: