User:Sammysah/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: (Philippine dynasty)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article to evaluate because I found that it was an extremely important aspect of the Philippines that I did not learn in this class and I think it will help me better understand the nation of the Philippines if I knew and understood its history in terms of its rulers.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it does. It is extremely apparent that the person who wrote it was very concise and they knew exactly what they where doing in terms of getting the information as short and understandable as possible. It is also apparent that the author was aware that the reader did not want any sort of distracting information and that they wanted to have very to-the-point facts.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead does include a brief description. This is a perfect example of how the author is again showing that the information is extremely concise and to the point. The descriptions for the article's major sections allows the reader to get alot of information in a short amount of time if they really wanted to because they could just read the description rather than going into extreme detail.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Yes it does to a certain extent. I can not answer no to this question indefinitely because there was some information that was not really present in the article itself; however, that information is so minimal that it is not a huge deal, as they are only small details.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is extremely concise. The author knew exactly what he/she was doing and they knew that they had to make it as concise as possible to attract the readers attention if they where interested in the topic in the first place. It also allows the reader to get the information in a quick manner in case they where in any sort of time crunch.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, the articles content is very relevant to the topic. It covers every aspect that I believed would be relevant to the topic in the first place and I thought that it did a great job of providing a reader with a lot of quality information.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes to a certain extent. It is up to date in the sense that it has all the information one needs; however, it has not been updated so recently so it can not really be said that it is up to date. The reason I said to a certain extent is because all the information one needs is probably in the article already, because it is information that is covering a very old topic.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * To my knowledge I do not believe there is any missing content or any content that does not belong in it. Because it is a fairly large topic and it is very old history, it is pretty hard to miss some content because it has all been retrieved such a long time ago, so there are not really new advancements or discoveries.

Content evaluation
The content is extremely concise and to the point. It provided me with a lot of information that did not bore me at all nor did it make me feel as if I was missing out on some important information. It worked really well together and I felt like I learned what I needed to learn about that topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes the article is neutral. Because there is not really alot of bias that comes with this sort of information, it is hard to not be neutral. I think that the author does a great job in explaining all the information without any sort of sides being taken.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No, I do not believe that there are any claims present that are biased. As I said previously, I think it is extremely hard for a person to be biased with this topic because it is very old history and does not have any sense to be biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * In this article, it seems like all viewpoints are represented pretty equally, and that they all have an equal length when its discussed in the article. It does not really have an apparent unbalance but I am sure that some sections are longer than the others.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No the article does not attempt to do that, as I said, the author purely stated concise and short facts throughout the article. I felt no sense of persuasion because there is not really anything to persuade the reader about.

Tone and balance evaluation
The tone of the article was extremely well formatted as well as the article being very well balance. I think the author did an amazing job in both of these categories and exemplified the manner in which one should write a wikipedia article.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Not all the facts are backed up by a secondary source of information, as it was lacking a little bit of sources in some of the facts that the author stated; however, it is not significant enough to completely not believe what was stated,
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes the sources are very thorough. I believe they reflect the available literature on the topic extremely well and that they do a great job in analyzing and portraying it in a manner that is well represented.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Because the topic is so old, the sources are obviously going to be old as well, so this question is not really applicable because new information is not really discovered so often in this sort of topic.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes, every link that I clicked on worked.

Sources and references evaluation
I think the author did a great job in terms of sources and having references because they where all very notable and solid references, and didnt really cite from anything else other than scholarly articles and books.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes the article is extremely well written. It is very clear and concise and gives all the information in a very stable and up-front format. It allows the reader to take in all the information quickly and does not provide any problems.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not see any sort of grammatical or spelling errors in the article.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes I believe the article is very well organized and that it has a great format. It has all the major points listed in perfect order that is very understandable and it allows the reader to get all the points in a very fast manner.

Organization evaluation
I think the article is organized perfectly and is the epitome of how a wikipedia article should be organized. All the sections where properly placed and it did not lack any sort of information that I felt should be there.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, the article includes numerous pictures throughout it. It does not necessarily enhance my understanding of the topic; however, it is still very appreciated and interesting to see how the people that ruled it at the time looked.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes, the images that are available are well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, all the images do adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations as well.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes, all the images are laid out in a manner that is extremely visually appealing, as it is all set up very orderly that is appealing to a persons eye.

Images and media evaluation
The article had a lot of great images that worked very well with the article and helped display how it worked together at the time,

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 not really going to be any conversations in the first place that are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic. It is extremely straightforward and there are minimal arguments.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * I am not exactly sure how it is rated but I am sure that it is not part of any WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not talked about this topic too much in class, as we mostly covered the archaeological part of the Philippines.

Talk page evaluation
It is extremely concise and has alot of good points made in it. It is not a very controversial topic.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is an active article that is in very good condition at the moment.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is extremely concise and gives alot of good information to the reader that will allow them to get what they need in a short amount of time without being mislead in any sort of manner. It is very well crafted and neutral.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think it can be improved by putting a little more pictures and updating more frequently. That is the only points that I would say.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I believe the article is extremely well developed and it is complete. It is very long but still concise and holds all the information that one would need about this topic.

Overall evaluation
It is a great article and I see it to be the epitome of how a Wikipedia article should be written. It has alot of good information that is very useful to the reader and is very concise.

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: