User:Ryancole48/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)

Korean War


 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have chosen to evaluate this article because it is an example of American Foreign Policy and is a relatively simple topic.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes, the introductory sentence briefly explains the two sides of the war.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

Yes, the Lead briefly describes the background, course of the war and aftermath.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

The only information included in the Lead that is not included elsewhere are statistics comparing the Korean War to other modern conflicts.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

The Lead is mostly concise, but contains some details that are better suited for the main body.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

Yes, the content is all related to the Korean War.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

Yes, the content is up-to-date.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

There is no missing content or content that isn't related to the topic.


 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Yes, by comparing the Korean War to the Vietnam War and World War 2, the article shows how destructive the war really was, even if it isn't a war that is often remembered as being incredibly violent. It also describes the atrocities committed by the opposing factions, which are not often talked about.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?

Yes, the article appears to be neutral.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

No, none of the claims made hold any bias towards either faction.


 * 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, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of either of the opposing factions.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

All of the facts are backed up by legitimate sources.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

Yes, the sources are thorough.


 * Are the sources current?

Some of the sources are recent, but some are also rather old.


 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

Yes, the sources are from a wide spectrum of authors.


 * 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, the article delivers the information very clearly.


 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

No, the article is grammatically correct.


 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Yes, the article is chronologically organized, which makes it easy to read and understand.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

Yes, the article includes photos of the people in the article, as well as photos from the battlefield and maps.


 * Are images well-captioned?

Yes, the the captions describe who and what the picture is of.


 * 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?

Someone is trying to claim that the atrocities listed in the article were perpetrated only by the United Nations Coalition Forces, and not both sides.


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

The article is a former good article nominee.


 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Wikipedia talks about both sides' perspectives of the war. Since our class is American Foreign Policy, we mostly discuss the American side.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?

Former good article nominee.


 * What are the article's strengths?

The article does a good job at providing information about the Korean War from a military perspective.


 * How can the article be improved?

The article can include a bit more information on the atrocities committed during the war.


 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

The article is 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: