User:Tinawww/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)Natsuo Kirino
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Because we had to

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It doesn't have enough information to describe the summary of this page
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? the table of content is is well-structured
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? there is a source we can't access anymore
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? too concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? I think there could be a little bit more of the recent works
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? the novels are not enough because she seems to be still alive but it does not have recent works

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? decent amount of neutrality
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are strong statements which i think is biased but they have a source linked to it so i guess it is not biased
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? underrepresented
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? Yes.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? most of them are linked to resources but some of them are from newspapers or websites which sometimes can be biased
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current? some of them we cannot access anymore
 * Check a few links. Do they work? no

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is very easy to read
 * 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? They have good major topics but the content is not enough

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? no
 * Are images well-captioned? no images
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? no images
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? there are no images

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? there are unsure things going on in the discussion, or people made corrections
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated either B or C
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Some references that newly covered

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Although the table of content is well structured, the content as the whole page is not enough
 * What are the article's strengths? the awards and novels she has is descriptive, very easy to look at
 * How can the article be improved? More images, and some recent and accessible and credible sources
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I think this wikipedia page is poorly developed in terms of the intro having not enough information as a summary of this page, and there were sources I could not access or its not recent.

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: