User:Sabrina2020/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: Closed adoption. Talk:Closed adoption
 * I chose to go through this article due to the fact that several of my cousins have been adopted, and adoption is something that has always touched and interested me. I wanted to learn more about it, and thought that this provided a good opportunity to do so.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The Lead includes an introductory sentence which obviously shows the definition of closed adoption, opening up the topic of the article clearly. It then shows the various sections, but it does not necessarily go through what major sections will be explored. It explains further what the article will talk about and what the opposite of closed adoption is. It is not overly detailed, and is precise in speaking about closed versus open adoption.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The article's contents are incomplete and sometimes are not relevant to Closed Adoption. They do talk about open adoption, but that is probably in effort to compare and contrast. It talked about natural parents versus adopted parents. The article is largely incomplete, and someone has incorrectly given a personal story. The sections are incomplete and do not add to the topic very well. The other articles that are referenced are all mostly at least ten years old. It refers to the wrong title of a book, which most likely does not belong in this section.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The article seems as though it is not very neutral. It gives many articles, but several people have inserted personal statements and questions. It is an incomplete article. It also repeats several sections. There is not enough information in most of the sections to really give a picture into Closed Adoption, and doesn't seem complete at all. Other than this, it seems to attempt to not be biased, but is not developed enough to give enough information on many things.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions

Much of the article has references, which is a good thing. On the other hand, there are some sections with personal statements and are written in the first person, lacking reliable secondary information. The other articles referenced are about closed adoption and are helpful. many of the sources are older, some are up to date, but there is a mixture of articles that should be more updated. Some of the links appear to work well.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions

The article is well written--in its introduction. The rest of the article is incomplete, written in the first person in most parts, repeats sections, and does not give very much information. It is not well written in most parts, and needs some heavy editing when more information is compiled. There are not many grammatical or spelling issues that I saw. The article would need to be re organized when more information is compiled and stated.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

There are no images in this article.


 * 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

The conversations were, as far as I know, personal and explanatory. They explained things that needed to be done, and so on. The article is not rated well. It has not been edited since December 2017. It was interesting seeing an actual Wikipedia article in the works; i think that it was different in the fact that I hadn't realized all the literal discussion regarding the article.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The article's overall status is rough; it needs a lot of work and completion. It does cite many articles, and has a good introduction. However, it's incomplete, has less than satisfactory information, and has several primary resources that don't coincide with Wikipedia. It is underdeveloped, but with editing and more information, it could be great.


 * 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?

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: