User:Saler2727/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an Article Questions:

Lead:

A good lead section define defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.

Questions about Lead:


 * 1) Does the lead include an introduction sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article’s topic? A. Yes, the lead includes an introduction sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article’s topic.


 * 1) Does the lead include a brief description of the article’s major sections? A. Yes, the lead include a brief description of the article’s major sections.


 * 1) Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn’t) A. No, the lead does not include information that is not present in the article.


 * 1) Is the lead concise, or is it overly detailed? A. The lead is overly detailed.

Content:

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Questions about Content:


 * 1) Is the article’s content relevant to the topic? A. Yes, the article’s content is relevant to the topic.


 * 1) Is the content up to date? A. No, the content is not up to date.


 * 1) Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? A. Yes, there is content that does not belong and content that is missing.


 * 1) Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia‘s equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? A. Yes, the article deal with one of Wikipedia’s equity gaps. Yes, it addresses topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

Tone and Balance:

Wikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.

Questions about Tone and Balance:


 * 1) Is the article neutral? A. Yes, the article is neutral.


 * 1) Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? A. No, there are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.


 * 1) Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented? A. No, there are no viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented.


 * 1) Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? A. No, minority or fringe viewpoints accurately are not described as such.


 * 1) Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? A. No, the article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

Sources and References:

A Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand when possible, this means academic and peer reviewed publications or scholarly books.

Questions about Sources and References:


 * 1) Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all the facts in the article are backed up by a reliable source secondary source of information.


 * 1) Are the sources thorough – i.e., do they reflect the available literature on the topic? A. Yes, the sources are thorough, they reflect the available literature on the topic.


 * 1) Are the sources current? No, the sources are not current.


 * 1) Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? A. Yes, the sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors.


 * 1) Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, they include historically marginalized individuals where possible.


 * 1) Are there better sources available such as peer reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.) Yes, there are better sources available such as peer reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites.


 * 1) Check a few links. Do they work? A. Yes, few links work.

Organization and Writing Quality

The writing should be clear and professional; the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

Questions for Organization and Writing Quality


 * 1) Is the article well written – i.e. is it concise, clear, and easy-to-read? A. The article is somewhat concise, clear, and easy-to-read.


 * 1) Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, the article does not have any grammatical or spelling errors.


 * 1) Is the article well-organized – i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? A. The article is somewhat well-organized, is broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic.

Images and Media:


 * 1) Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No, the article does not include images that enhance understanding of the subject.


 * 1) Are images well captioned? A. No, there are no images in the article.


 * 1) Do all images adhere to Wikipedia ‘s copyright regulations? A. No, there are no images in the article.


 * 1) Are the images laid out in a visually-appealing way? A. There are no images in the article.

Talk Page Discussion:

The article’s Talk Page - and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there - can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn’t think of.

Questions for Talk Page Discussion:


 * 1) What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? A. The kinds of conversations are bringing up clearer points about addiction of pornography.


 * 1) How is the article rated?  A. This article is rated C-class.


 * 1) Is it a part of any wiki projects? Yes, there is a part of wiki projects.

Overall Impressions

Questions for Overall Impressions:


 * 1) What is the article ‘s overall status? A. The article’s overall status is active in editings with being an article of interest.


 * 1) What are the article’s strengths? A. The strengths of the article are that presents strong points and examples, presents strong subtopics.


 * 1) How can the article be improved? A. The article can be improved by having more trusted sources.


 * 1) How would you assess the articles completeness – i.e. is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? A. I would assses the article’s completeness as a well-developed article.

Examples of good feedback:

A good article evaluation can take a number of forms; the most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.

Which article are you evaluating?
Effects of Pornography

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this topic because it seems interest how this habit affect us in our daily lives. This matters more for the youth whom consume more of this source so they can know what are the effects of this consumption. My preliminary impression of it was the gravity of effects that this consumption has and how can we overcome it.

Evaluate the article
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)

The article "Effects of Pornography" is somewhat well-organized, but with a rate of C-class with high importance. Firstly, the lead is concise and clearer with a brief description of the article's major sections. The article is relevant to the topic, the authors present the article in a neutral position.The sources are backed up with reliable secondary sources of information. The article does not include images that can help understand the topic. The article can be improved by putting more trusted sources with stronger points or topics.