User:QiwenJiang/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) Trail of Tears: (Trail of Tears)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I recently learned a topic of race, power and identity in my anthropology class. "Trail of Tears" is the best example that revealed a tragedy of Indians caused by the interaction of race and power.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The Lead is concise, it showed a clear summary and key points of "Trail of Tears".

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.
 * 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

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Most of them are backed up with resources, but some data are questioned in talk page.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Yes.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? The sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors. They don't include historically marginalized individuals.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they work.

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? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes.

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 is a conversation about the actual number of death toll.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? This article has been rated as C-Class. It is a part of many WikiProjects, such as WikiProjects of Alabama and WikiProject of History.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This article included more information than I learn in class. For example, I learn how Indians were forced to leave their homeland by Anglo-American. But this article showed briefly how the member of Cherokee, Muscogee, Seminole, Chickasaw and Choctaw were forced to move west.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Good.
 * What are the article's strengths? Gives a clear Lead, well-organized and separate into sections that help people easier to understand.
 * How can the article be improved? Can find more resources to prove an accurate data.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is well-developed.

==== Overall evaluation: Overall this is a great article that provide people a deep understanding of American history. It contains a clear Lead, a lots of images with well-captioned and also many reference to back up the information in this article. ====

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: