User:Savannahobrien/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: Academic Discipline
 * This article was chosen to evaluate because I was interested in the topic due to the fact that it is information that pertains to us college students.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes it does. The first sentence is giving the definition an academic discipline.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No It does not.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No it does not.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is very concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes it is
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Most of them are
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes
 * Are the sources current? The majority of the sources are at least ten years old but there are some that are recent.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes. the information was very easy to read and it was clearly written.
 * 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? Yes. The way it was organized made it flow really well from one topic to the next.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

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 aren't many conversations going on. Mainly it is just individuals stating the revisions they have made and why.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rates as low-importance and rated as a Start-class on the quality scale
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? The article went in to depth on some history I didn't know about the topic, but overall the topic was something I already knew information on going into the reading.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? The article is rates as low-importance and rated as a Start-class on the quality scale
 * What are the article's strengths? The article is very neutral and it has a lot of nice information.
 * How can the article be improved? I believe that there needs to be more sources. There are very few sources for the amount of information presented.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that it is underdeveloped.

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: