User:Redworah/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: Calligraphy
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

The article appeared to be interesting to read and very informative about the topic.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, the Lead does have a solid introductory sentence that concisely describes the article's topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The Lead does include a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The Lead does include information that is not present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise and informative.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article's content is relevant to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content is definitely up to date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?'
 * I do not think there is content that does not belong that I notice.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article certainly is neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * I do not notice any claims that appear to be biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The section on Mayan Calligraphy might possibly be underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The article seems to be relatively well edited and balanced.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes the facts do appear to be backed up by a reliable secondary source.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources definitely do reflect the available literature.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources appear to be current.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * The links do work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is definitely well written.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * The article does not have any grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * The article is well organized solidly.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * The article does include images that enhance the understanding of the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The images are definitely well captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * They do.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images appear to be laid out in a way that is easy to understand.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * The conversations are mostly related to organization and structure.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is a B-Class article and is part of the WikiEducation Foundation. The WikiProjects are Visual Arts, Religion, Islam.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class
 * The wikipedia article appears to look at the

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is currently a B-Class article and a level 3 vital article.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The article is well balanced and contains many different points of view.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article appears to be very solidly developed as is and has been developed and edited for over a decade now.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article appears to be very well 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: