User:Samira Hamzehei/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: Betty Birner
 * Betty Birner is a leading researchers in pragmatics with many publications, and I believe those interested in this field need to know her more.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it does.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * No, it doesn't. The lead section includes a sentence which is incapable of describing the article's major sections. It contains some very general information.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, it doesn't.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is not detailed enough to be a convincing lead section. It needs clarifications and specific detailed information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, it is. But it is too short. This is where you are supposed to find a complete explanation of her work and research, but it is not well-developed. More headings and subheadings with detailed information are needed to categorize her different works and research areas.
 * Is the content up-to-date? I don't think so. I think it must be updated with some new information about her research details.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There is definitely a lot missing. I believe any reader likes to read more and precise sentences about what she really focuses on.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, it is.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, there aren't.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, there aren't.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it doesn't.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Not really. I believe it doesn't contain good sources. I don't think blogs alone are enough as references for an article about a researcher.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I don't think so. Because much remains to be discussed.
 * Are the sources current? No, they aren't. They go back a few years.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they do.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it is. It is smooth and easy to follow. But it needs to be improved both in details and updated information.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not especially.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The article is too short to contain any points to discuss about. It definitely needs to be broken in to sections and parts.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? It only contains one image of her.
 * 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? Only a few comments are left. Some are questions and others suggestions.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is part of two WikiProjects. WikiProject Chicago and WikiProject Women Scientists.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It's not all that different.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is incomplete, very short, and not up-to-date.
 * What are the article's strengths? Most of the sentences are clear and easy to follow.
 * How can the article be improved? I believe some of her publications are missing. Published works should have been mentioned both in the text as reference.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly conducted.

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: