User:Ranger Yahoo/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: Great Basin National Park
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I visited GBAS when I was a Park Ranger in Utah and wanted to evaluate this page to see if it would be worth adding to it, as that park really peaked my interests.

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? No.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes and no, everything is up to date but I believe there are sections about the park's natural history that are absent.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? See above. Yes.

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? Some geological history appears to not have been included, however the majority of what may interest a typical viewer appears to be present.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Not at all.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes.
 * Are the sources current? Yes, as much as they can be (last 70 years).
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes.

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, I think.
 * 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? None.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Yes, WikiProjects Nevada.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? There are no discussion

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Inactive, succinct, but could use more ecological/historical context.
 * What are the article's strengths? Succinct, explains things in layman's terms.
 * How can the article be improved? More information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Medium-developed. Its functional but could use more info.

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: