User:Sabrina.desousa2/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: Talk:Alexandra Stan vs. Marcel Prodan
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article because it was the first one that I was able to find to evaluate

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * It talks about the when and where as well as who and why and what
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * it does not however it does have a content list to be able to go to whichever section is desired.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * From what I can tell all the information in the lead is present in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It contains concise details

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?
 * not inherently

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * from what I can tell, yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Not apparently
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * One is more represented than the other, however I don't think there is any overrepresented but one view is underrepresented
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * It appears to more in favour of one side however it does not seem to try to persuade the reader

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?
 * All sources are surrounding the dates and that are illustrated in the article
 * 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?
 * not from what I can tell
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes although it could be broken down further into more narrowed topics

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * There are no images or media


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * No conversations
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated Level C and is a part of 4 WikiProjects
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * N/A

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is a Good article nomminee
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It gives good sources that apply directly to the source
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Images and more background
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I believe that it is well developed however there is room for more development

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: