User:ToddMillerKSU/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.


 * Article Link: History of terrorism
 * Brief Description:
 * We are not to this point in class quite yet but terrorism is an important factor of American Foreign Policy.

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?
 * Not really, they begin with a brief overview of what the first case of recorded terrorism was and when the term originated. Which I think is useful information, but they then go on to repeat it in the next paragraph.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Half of the information in the Lead is only present in the subsequent paragraph which repeats the same information.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * I think it is overly detailed, perhaps in this case the authors were not sure what to do with the Lead. It would be a bit difficult since a reader knows what to expect from the article based on the subject. Perhaps they could get rid of the definition paragraph and I would feel better about the Lead.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * For the most part, it is brought up on the Talk page whether or not the French Reign of Terror is topical.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * Perhaps the early terrorism section the article could do without. It says in that section that these were political assassinations and that depending on the definition this might not qualify as terrorism.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * I don't think so.

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?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes
 * 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?
 * Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Not that I noticed
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * After the first couple sections yes.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * I believe so.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Not particularly, most of them are quite small and relegated to the outside edges of the page.

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 was a revert war that was going on a couple years ago. There is also a lot of questions about whether or not state sponsored actions are relevant to the topic, and if so why are other examples not included.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated as C-class and as a level-5 vital article. This article is of interest to the Politics and Terrorism WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not really gotten into the meat and potatoes of this topic in class yet.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is a "former good article nominee".
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * I think the content provides a good overview when it gets to more modern examples of terrorism.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think the article would benefit from a stricter definition of terrorism. It should be made clear whether or not state sponsored acts qualify and if so cover Nazi Germany, Stalin's Russia, and the Cultural Revolution at all or more in depth. I personally think that state acts should not be included and another separate article would better cover that content.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I have brought up the issues myself and others have with the article, outside of those I think the article is well-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: