User:Shania145/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: "Sleeper Effect"
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article to evaluate because it was interesting to learn about how persuasion can change a perspective of an individual. Persuasion is something we encounter everyday of our lives, so it is a relevant article that can also be applied to me in the real world application.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes. The first sentence is kind of a thesis sentence that summarizes the whole article.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, the lead does not include a brief description of the article's major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise and easy to understand.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date?Yes.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Not really, but the article does not have to apply to everyone. Since every individual has a different way of perceiving ideas.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, everything was pretty straightforward.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Somewhat yes.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?Yes.
 * Are the sources current?No, they are mostly from the 1900's.
 * 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, it is easy to understand.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


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

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? I don't think so.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I would say it could add in more useful information.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? It is fairly good source to understand what the sleeper effect is, in general. But I wouldn't suggest it for a more detailed understanding to how it works.
 * What are the article's strengths? It is concise and easy to understand. The article seemed very interesting and included important information.
 * How can the article be improved? There needs to be more current references used for the article, because the sources are mostly from 1900s.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say it is well-developed but there can always be some room for improvement. Maybe should add what different age ranges this phenomena applies to and how it differentiates between different ages.

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: