User:Tiffany.chl903/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: Bacteriology
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Related to our course.

Lead

 * Guiding questions

Yes it does include an include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. It does include a brief description of the article. The Lead does not include information that is not present in the rest of the article and it is concise.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * The content is relevant to bacteriology, although the content does not appear up-to-date. The content elaborates mainly on history and does not mention any present studies or changes in this branch of science. The introduction subset seems to repeat what the Lead paragraph mentions.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions
 * The article is neutral and does not appear heavily biased.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * The sources do provide reliability to the content. However, as the content is not up to date, the sources do not appear thorough and do not reflect the available literature on the topic. The links do work, although most sources are journals.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * It is concise, clear, and easy to read; there are no grammatical or spelling errors. The article is organized, but there are only 2 sections.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * The images are well-captioned and laid out in a visually appealing way.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions
 * There are conversations regarding the separation of bacteriology and microbiology, which lead to the division of the two articles.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * The overall status is that the article is stub-class and of low importance. The article is short and concise, but has not current information and does not elaborate much on the advances that bacteriology has provided in the present world, such as in the field of medicine. I would say that the article is underdeveloped.


 * 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?

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: