User:ShredlifeMTBer/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: Walkabout
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I have chosen this article because it was it is an easily relatable subject. The information appears to be limited in the article which should be a good opportunity to expand. It was rated at "start class" and "low importance".

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes, the introductory sentence provides a clear picture of the topic that is presented.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * yes, but the major sections them selves are broad in nature.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * concise and provides a overall road map.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes, but information is not complete in some instances.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Certain aspects are missing and information is broad. There is a lack of history. surrounding the walkabout.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * If briefly covers the relations between the underrepresented indigenous people of Australia.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * In the talk page, but not published.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The walkabout is not covered from the view of an Aborigine. Does not cover whether it is religious or what it is referred to in their language. Focuses more on the friction it causes between the indigenous people and the settlers.
 * 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?
 * some sources are missing.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * No, sources need to be found for information.
 * Are the sources current?
 * some links appear to be old or broken.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * While the information is written by a few individuals, there is lacing information from the indigenous people.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * some do not.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * information present is clear and concise.
 * 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

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Only one photo, another relevant photo would be more aesthetically pleasing.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * no

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Few conversations. only one comment from this year. talks about the necessity for citations.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * Related to more Australian topics. part of wikiproject Australia.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It does not the conversations are very similar to the training on talks. Everyone is respectful to one another.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * rated as start class and low importance
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * definitions and a clear topic
 * How can the article be improved?
 * citations, pictures, and historical information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * the article is underdeveloped, but has a good base to build upon.

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: