User:Tariace/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: A language is a dialect with an army and navy
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. It's a new concept to me; the article title seems abnormally long; there is a decent amount but not a lot of content

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes somewhat
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Doesn't give a thorough explanation of the quip
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Relatively concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? As much as it can be
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Doesn't have adequate explanation of the quip
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No, no

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? Yes, but it doesn't address how good/bad the quip is
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Only talks about a few people
 * 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? Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Seem thorough enough
 * Are the sources current? Adequate, this phrase should not have changed since 2005-2010
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Seem okay
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Relatively clear
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not from first glance
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Only two additional sections -- still needs more info

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No images
 * 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? Discussion about semantics, purpose of article
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? C rated, low importance, part of Linguistics
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? N/A

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? 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: