User:SAO303/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) Female genital mutilation in India
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because I found it interesting. I was curious as to the dangers of the practice and wanted to know more about it.

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? It is concise and to the point, but does not give any hint to the rest of the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? It seems biased, only talking about India when there are other countries that have the Practice of FGM
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The article has mostly talk about ending the practice, but makes sense due to the subject matter.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? They only seem to make claims about India contributing to FGM and not many other places.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No. It just provides information with no intent behind the words.

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? Most seem to be within a year old.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes. Links are working.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It seems to be a lot of facts dropped onto a page in generally easy to read formats.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? None that I have found.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The topic only seems to have one major point and that is that the practice needs to be stopped. There is nothing talking about why the practice is done other than religious reasons, but no detail is gone into.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No, there are no images.
 * 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


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? there are none
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article has been edited once. It is of interest to wikiprojects but the importance is "low"
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? We haven't talked of FGM in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths? Lots of statistical information given by sources.
 * How can the article be improved? Sources could be reviewd and checked for accuracy and content.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? This article is underdeveloped and could use a lot of work.

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: