User:Rebecca Topper/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.


 * Pizza effect
 * The Pizza effect article is listed under the "Religious Studies" category, and I was intrigued by the title.

Lead

 * Guiding question


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
The Lead begins with a clear introductory sentence and continues with a concise description of the Pizza Effect. It is well cited and contains both the history and meaning of the term. The Lead does not mention the article's major sections, but it seems to be effective overall.

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
The content is all relevant to the topic. The largest category contains examples illustrating the Pizza Effect, which are helpful in understanding how it works. Not all of the examples are written totally clearly, but there are a large number of them. The content is up-to-date, some of the examples are more recent than others, but timeliness is not as crucial in finding illustrative examples. The criticism section seems to be criticism of one of the examples more than criticism of the concept. The section is therefore either unclear or should probably not be a section of its own.

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
The article seems to rely largely on examples from "Eastern Religions." This may be because the man who coined the term was a Hindu monk and the original examples were from India. Otherwise, I don't think the article shows a 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
A couple of the examples in the article aren't cited, but all of the others are. One of the links I tested did not work, but it seems like the others do. It does seem like the links are specific sources to back up individual examples, but I don't know that there are may sources discussing the Pizza Effect in general.

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
The article is well-organized into sections. The section on "Variants" does not read very clearly. The article doesn't have any grammatical or spelling errors.

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
There are no images in the article.

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
The talk page for this article is pretty sparse. It differs most vastly from the way we've discussed it in class based on politeness (my favorite comment title is "Bullshit in the first place"). The other comment that I didn't expect is regarding adding an example, and the comment contains the entire example but no title so it was unclear what the text was in the beginning.

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 think the article could only be further developed if there was more research done on the topic or if the topic becomes more wisely used. As it currently stands, it seems that the article is overall of good quality and well-developed.

The article's strengths are its clear Lead (including its introductory explanation) and its large number of examples. Some of the examples could be better or more completely explained, but the number of examples helps balance out any issues.

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: