User:Spooky31/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: (link) Copernican heliocentrism
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have chosen to evaluate this article because it is something I t and am very interested in.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
'''The lead does include a concise and clear introductory sentence. The lead includes a brief description of some of the article's major sections, but some are left out. Everything in the lead is included in the article. The lead is pretty concise, but could be more concise while adding the other major sections into it.'''

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
'''Everything in the article is relevant to the topic and up to date. There is not content in the article that does not belong there and there does not seem to be any content missing. This article does not deal with equity gap or underrepresented populations or topics.'''

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
'''This article is very neutral and is not biased toward a particular position. I think all of the viewpoints are represented well and thoroughly and does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of a particular position.'''

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
'''The article contains a wide variety of sources that are thorough, current, and diverse. The links do work and look to be from credible authors.'''

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
'''The article is very easy to read and is well-organized. It is concise and clear and there are no grammatical or spelling errors.'''

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
'''The images included in this article are well picked and enhance the understanding of the topic. There could be more images in my opinion that would further enhance the topic. They are laid out in an appealing way and adhere to copyright regulations.'''

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

Talk page evaluation
'''The main conversations on the talk page are about adding some additional information to the article. The article is rated B-class and is not a part of a WikiProjects.'''

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
'''I would also rate this article B-class. It is very good in explaining the topics they chose to display but it could include other topics and more images to support it. It is well-developed and just needs a few extra things to be put in A-class for me.'''

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: