User:Taylor Mahon/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:

Psychoactive Plant


 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I have chosen this article because over the last few months learning about these different psychoactive plants has intrigued my interest about their benefits on society and their positives & negatives in the world today.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes, the lead describes what psychoactive plants are, how they are digested & their effects.


 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

Yes, the article identifies a few most commonly used psychoactive plants, their common preparation, their main active constituent, and their psychoactive effects.


 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

No, everything that is briefly described in the lead is further disused in the article with more description.


 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

The lead was concise, cut to the point and was short but filled with explanation involving psychoactive plants.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

The articles content is relevant to the topic and only talks about psychoactive plants & the plant kingdom and where psychoactive plants come from in the plant kingdom.


 * Is the content up-to-date?

Yes, the content is up to date.


 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

There is no missing content, the article includes everything important it should have.


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

It doesn't deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps, I feel like it does address topics related to historically underrepresented topics, which would be cannabis.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?

Yes, the article is neutral.


 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

The article seems to believe that psychoactive plants can be used commonly and wants the readers to know how & what psychoactive plants are used in or for.


 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

I think that the viewpoints are underrepresented because of the past history and some people's bad experiences that the world let negatively affect THEMSELVES.


 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

To me it seems like the article wants to persuade the reader that psychoactive plants are not bad and are actually used for daily things on a regular basis.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

Yes, all secondary source information backs up the article & facts in the article.


 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

These sources are thorough and offer A LOT of information and literature on psychoactive plants in particular and all the sources are involved with psychoactive plants in one way or another.


 * Are the sources current?

Yes, the sources are current & up to date.


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

These sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors, not just one.


 * Check a few links. Do they work?

I checked all the links, they all work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

'''The article is well-written, its concise and very clear to understand. It sticks to one topic the whole time and doesn't jump around.'''


 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

All grammar and spelling is right.


 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

'''The article is very well organized. It starts off with what psychoactive plants are and how they are used and what they are used in. Then it explains the examples of psychoactive plants, then it goes into the plant kingdom and how psychoactive plants are found in the plant kingdom, and important facts to know about them!'''

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

Yes the article includes images that enhance the understanding of psychoactive plants.


 * Are images well-captioned?

Yes, all images and well-captioned with the correct name.


 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

The images all follow Wikipedia's copyright regulations.


 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Yes, the images in the article look very good and appealing to the article.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

Conversations going on behind the scenes about psychoactive plants are they want to pass Cannabis and vote to have Cannabis removed from controlled substance act in the House.


 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

'''This article is rated high-importance. It is apart of WikiProjects WikiProject Pharmacology, WikiProject Plants, & WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs.'''


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

'''The way Wikipedia discusses this topic is very descriptive and filled with definitions and new words and phrases. We've never discussed this topic in class.'''

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?

'''I think the overall status is well done. The article could have included more detail, facts and descriptions. It's good but it could have included more for it to reach a higher score.'''


 * What are the article's strengths?

The articles details are well understanding of the article, details about psychoactive plants, creativity with the "examples of psychoactive plants" grid table, includes other links for other psychoactive plants, cacti, fungi, etc.


 * How can the article be improved?

There could be more psychoactive plant details, more plant details and comparisons and contrasts.I feel as if the article was short and quickly made, if there was more time spent on it it could have been much better and more detailed & included more details on everything including psychoactive plants.


 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

I would say it is underdeveloped, it definitely needs to include more details and explanation on the effects, how its used, how they can be used for certain things, and include more photos.

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: