User:Simeonbauer/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.


 * Rachel Lloyd (chemist): (Link)
 * I am a Chemistry fanatic

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?                              Yes
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?                                   no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?                   I would say Its concise

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?         Needs more content on her works as a Chemist

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?           Very Neutral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?   Nope, just facts about her life.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?         I think some of the information on her research and work with sweet beat was underrepresented, need more information  to be more in depth
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?    nope

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?     Yes Mostly may need more source on Life Events
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?    Yes it represents the Literature as being true
 * Are the sources current?                                                                  yes sources are  current
 * 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?              Its easy to read, clear and concise
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?                               Well Written
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?             May need more work if more information is added.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?        No Images except for a link to one.
 * Are images well-captioned?                                                      N/A
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?                      N/A
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?                            N/A

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?         Not really
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?               Not much difference just question about gaps, missing information and question on her ?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?           C Class
 * What are the article's strengths?               Engaging Lead and summary, I found it very interesting
 * How can the article be improved?                Need more in depth, more information, and discuss more on her work with sweet beats
 * 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 the over all completeness is underdeveloped, needs more work

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: