User:RachelKWalsh/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: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disability_in_ancient_Rome
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have chosen this article because I plan to edit and improve it this semester as my wikipedia project.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * The article does include a informative introductory sentence that gets to the point of the article. It does briefly describe the articles contents but more can be added on its major sections.
 * The lead does not contain information that is not in the article but it dose leave out information that is in it. The questions it generates before further reading are not answered to the fullest. The lead is also concise and to the point, could be more detailed.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * The content is somewhat relative to the topic and contains sections of information that can be found in other wikipedia articles. Contents of the article can be updated, last update was in 2017 and some content could be missing because there are missing citations.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

There are several sections where the information is weighted or controversial that needs to be addressed and updated for clarity. (There is a note stating this in the notable romans with disabilities section.) the mental illnesses are over represent compared to any physical disabilities mentioned.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

There are missing citations and ones that could be updated or improved on.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is concise and not any large amounts of issues in the writing. It could be organized better as well just to break down each section and the information more, article could be more in-depth.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * There are no images in this article, this can bee improved on.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

There are two conversations on the broad topic of disabilities in Ancient Rome that point out the weighted attention to only mentally ill romans, the article should reach beyond that and address all disabilities.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The status of the article is s-starter class.

The articles strengths are in is broad information of disabilities in Ancient Rome that even without extreme detail do get the general point across.

one section in particular about notable romans with disabilities needs work to balance it. The article needs work to be more developed. It also doesn't state how romans judged or categorized disabilities or mental illnesses, that should also be added. The article is in need of major development.


 * 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?

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: