User:Slug145/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: Astrology and astronomy
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because we are studying the astronomical processes that Sivic civilizations had to go through.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

The articles lead is very brief, yet it is concise for the information it leads us to expect. The article birefly summarizes the difference between Astronomy and Astrology, which the article further dissects later. No new information is presented in the lead.


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

 * Guiding questions

The articles information is relevant and up to date, with many of its references from the 2010s and 2000s. No content is missing or irrelevant in the article.


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions

The tone of the article is informative and very formal. The writer of the article can clearly be seen trying to present their information in a balanced, academic manner throughout. Both astronomy and astrology are fairly represented with no negative connotations towards either. The article doesn't necessarily try to persuade the reader, but rather inform them on the positions that astrologists and astronomers take.


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * The article does a good job at constantly citing their citations throughout. Most sentences contain either a link to further articles, or have endnotes. The article on average has a couple endnotes per paragraph, and most of the sentences are linked to other articles. The links in the reference section work, albeit the pages are slow to load. The sources are pretty current, with the range of them from 1961-2011. This indicates that this article has not been rewritten with more current sources, but they are still current enough for the purposes of general concepts of Astronomy and Astrology.


 * 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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * The article is well written and manageable to read through. The sections are clear and defined, and each topic gets their own explanations before the two are compared with one another. From what I could tell there were no grammatical or spelling errors.


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions

There are four images in the article, and they show how people went about testing their theories of the heavens. So for the articles purposes they do enhance the understanding of the people behind these processes. These images are briefly, yet concisely captioned, and adhere to wikipedias copyright rules. The layout of the images is appealing.


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions

The conversations on the talk page are on how to present the article, which information is relevant, and what premise should be represented for Astronomy and Astrology. The article is rated Start-Class and Mid-Importance. It is a part of two Wiki projects. The conversations on Astronomy differ from our class discussions in the sense that Wikipedias users tend to be informal when discussing the topic at hand. The users for this article are mostly concerned with which bits of info should be represented, rather than if the information is correct or not.


 * 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?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions

The status of the article is that its a decent, compact article that goes into just enough detail to be effective, but not too much to the point of overload. The articles conciseness and wide coverage of the topic allow the reader to have enough information to start thinking about the subject, and incentives them to look deeper into the topic. One improvement I could see being added to this article is expanding on Sinic Astronomy and Astrology, since the article goes into Euro and Islamic sciences. But other than that, the article is well developed and complete.


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

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: