User:Sprybutok/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: Green roof
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen this article because green roofs fascinate me. Green roofs are complex in their designs because they mix nature, architecture, and human elements to create a unique landscape. The article was also thorough in analyzing the benefits as well as the disadvantages. There were many different examples that were listed in order to reference the concept of a green roof.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? The Lead has an introductory sentence that that concisely and clearly describes what a green roof is and is composed of.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? No, there is not a brief description of the article's major section. However, there is talk of a few things that should have probably gone into the different sections in the Lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, the Lead include information that is not present in the green roof article such as the distinction between intesive and extensive green roofs. I think that this difference and explanation should be its separate section.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? I believe that the Lead is overly detailed. It contains information such as measurements and numbers that should be placed in a section which covers the topic instead of the introduction into the article.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the article's content relevant to the topic. The content matched the section and the information stayed on track of green roofs.
 * Is the content up-to-date? Yes, the content up-to-date. Although there are always advancements in green roofs, the information presented is still accurate.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? I believe that the article should have a section which explains the different types of green roofs in more detail. For example, the article should have a section which elaborates on extensive versus intensive and the different construction methods used for each.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, the article was neutral. It balanced the positive and negatives by giving the different section for each.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? The claims that were stated were backed up with facts and figures, but for the most part, the article leaned towards the positive side of implementing green roofs.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, I believe the article held a good balance between overrepresentation and underrepresenttion.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? There was no persuasion, but there were a lot of positive facts about green roofs.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, there were many citations at the end from different source types.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, they reflect the available literature on the topic of green roofs
 * Are the sources current? Yes, the sources are current. There is a good mix between current and old to show the different points in history of green roofs.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, the links I went to work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the article well-written. It was easy to read the article, there was not unnecessary information, and the word choices were clear.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? If there were grammatical errors, I was not able to catch them.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, the article well-written. It thought that the types section could be moved up as the first, but other than that, the flow of the different section that represented the major points.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, the images related well to what the context was bout in the placement.
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, the images' captions gave me a clear understanding of what it was showing.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes, I believe it does?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, the image layout is clear and organized as well as appealing.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? There is a lot of Talk behind the scenes about how to represent green roofs. There are many different opinions and a very much elaborated section on disadvantage. There were also quite a few questions in the Talk section.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article was within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, was rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale, and rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. It is also a part of the WikiProject Environment, was rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale, and rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. It is also a part of the WikiProject Environment
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I was not too different because the classes present the pro and cons, the same as the article, and other similar context. The main difference is that, in class, the teachers often times advocate for green roofs and are not neutral.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I thought that the article was very informative and a well-done Wiki page.
 * What are the article's strengths? The strengths of the green roof articles was that there was a lot of citations and information to back up the claims.
 * How can the article be improved? I think that the article could expand more on the disadvantages section.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would assess the articles completeness as a well-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: