User:Ssweeney17/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: Leslie Jamison
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. She's an essayist whose work I admire.

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 succinctly summarizes the essayist's most notable public accomplishments and career work. As the article is a personal page, the major sections correspond easily. There's no disconnected or jarring information, and it reads well.

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?

Content evaluation
There are no new sources from 2019, the most recent being 2018, thought the page itself was last updated in December. The Books section mentions her most recent release, Make It Scream, Make It Burn, but it's not listed in the bibliography section and should be updated accordingly.

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
The tone seems relatively unbiased in it's reporting of Jamison's personal life. There's one sentence to her Personal life section, and very little charged sentences or tone besides acknowledgement of public support for her work.

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?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
There are 28 sources, most all of them fully formatted save for the 28th: "Online version is titled 'Leslie Jamison’s 'The Recovering' and the stories we tell about drinking'." The article also lacks a direct listing for Jamison's most recent book, although it's sourced in the citations.

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
There are no apparent grammatical or spelling errors, and the information is well organized though clearly unbalanced: the Personal Life section is comes after the weightier sections.

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
There is only one picture: it abides by copyright regulations, but could be a more professional headshot.

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
There is only one contributor.

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'd say the article is well written and thoroughly sourced for a CNF author, though the content does need to be updated and could be further 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: