User:SarahA99/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.


 * Truth Condition: (Truth condition)
 * I chose this article to evaluate because it is a topic that interests me, and I would like to learn more about it even if I wasn't in a pragmatics class. So I want to evaluate the Wikipedia page over the topic to make sure it's a good source of information on the subject.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? no, the introductory sentence is really vague and does not describe the topic clearly enough.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, the lead sentence doesn't talk about any major sections, it only briefly describes what truth condition means.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is very brief and while it does provide a general description of the topic, it isn't that comprehensive.

Lead evaluation
The lead is not bad, but it's extremely vague. I didn't quite grasp the general concept at all from the lead sentence alone. It could be expanded on more.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the content is relevant to the article topic
 * Is the content up-to-date? No, not really. The most recently dated source was from 2013, which was seven years ago. I'm sure there is more updated information found on the topic.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There isn't anything that doesn't belong, but there could be more said about the sections of the topic, and about the topic itself in more depth overall.

Content evaluation
Overall, the content is relevant and does have useful information, just not enough of it. And another thing I noticed is that it's mostly examples and not a lot of description or history of the topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? No, the last paragraph is not really neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Yes. The claims of a "popular argument" that some sentences are necessarily true
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? There are no studies provided over the topic, The research behind it is definitely underrepresented.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Tone and balance evaluation
The content is neutral up until the last paragraph where the editor is heavily biased toward a certain argument and does not really discuss the opposing argument along side it.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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? No, all the sources are pretty old, the most recent one is from 2013, which is 7 years ago now.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? No

Sources and references evaluation
I tried to click on the links at the bottom of the page but I could not get to any of them. They are also old sources, so the content of the page probably is outdated.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, it's easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? No

Organization evaluation
The article is not difficult to read, but it could be broken down better into sections the reflect the major points of the topic better. But there are not any spelling or grammatical mistakes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There are no images provided to enhance understanding of the topic.

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 is criticism about the page not providing enough information
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? rated as star-class. part of WikiProjects Philosophy
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The wikipedia doesn't go in depth the way we do in class about the topic.

Talk page evaluation
There is a lot of negative criticism on the page. Mostly saying that the article isn't lengthy enough and doesn't provide all the important information. It is rated as star-class and is a part of WikiProjects Philosophy.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Not that great
 * What are the article's strengths? It has credible sources, relevant information, good examples.
 * How can the article be improved? The topic needs to be elaborated on, the article is too short. Not enough information provided to fully understand truth condition.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? underdeveloped

Overall evaluation
The article is not lengthy enough, and does not expand on the topic enough and is missing a lot of important factors. The topic needs to be elaborated on. The article is underdeveloped and definitely needs some work. The sources are old and the links don't even work when you click on them.

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: