User:Sydney394/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) Norse dragon
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose to evaluate this article because it's the only one I've chosen to look at so far. I should find a more complete one for this because this article has very little information.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article 's topic? It's concise, but I feel like it'' s missing something.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? There are no major sections.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The Lead is very concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes.
 * Is the content up-to-date? As far as I know.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? There may be content missing, I'm not sure.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? There are no sources.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It's barely an article at all.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No.
 * 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


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Someone corrected it several years ago, but I can't find the exact date.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It's part of Cryptozoology, Norse history and culture, and Norse Mythology.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Stub, low importance
 * What are the article's strengths? It exists and has a good starting point.
 * How can the article be improved? Add sources, expand on details, make it more interesting.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is underdeveloped.

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: