User:Tree79/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: (History of geography)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I am in the process of becoming a history teacher and am interested in teaching geography.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes it clearly describes the topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It hits on some but not all of the major sections of this topic.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The article does not mention cartography as mentioned in the Lead.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise and to the point.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * The article's content is relevant to the topic in question.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * All content seems to belong and there does not seem to be anything missing from the article.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * The article does have some underrepresented populations.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, this article provides a neutral stance.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * There are no claims that appear heavily biased.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * There is little information shown for Egypt and Babylon.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * This is not a persuasive topic.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Sources appear to come from reliable journals and articles.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources seen come from Encyclopedias, journals, and academic institutions.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources appear to be current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Sources appear to come from a diverse group of individuals.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Links I have tried did work correctly.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is very concise and easy to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * I did not see any grammatical or spelling errors within this article.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * This article is very well organized and reflects the major points of the topic.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * There are very few images included for this article.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * The images that are included are well-captioned.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes the images do adhere to copyright regulations.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * No, the images do not appear visually appealing.

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 are going on as to what sections to add into the article.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-Class, it is part of the History of Science, wikiproject.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia does not dive deep into each piece included into the article. Much more could be added.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is listed as a Level-4 Vital Article in History.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * This article is divided well regarding content.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * There are sub-pages of this article that could be elaborated on.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * This article is underdeveloped and has the potential to have much more information. The history of geography is focusing on only certain parts of the world.

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: