User:Troutleap/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: Suicide of Leelah Alcorn
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I was in high school at the time of Leelah's death, and I think this is a topic I know a fair bit about.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes, it identifies who she was, why her death was significant, and when it was.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes, her life, death, public response are the major topics of the article, all mentioned in the lead
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? it is concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes, very relevant
 * Is the content up-to-date? yes it is up to date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? no

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes, despite the topic, it remains netral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? reading at first, it might seem so, but I believe that it is because so many direct quotes are used which paint one party better than the other. it is the story of a girl who's parents harmed her and whose actions, in the girls own words, pushed her to suicide, it's tough to sound impartial when so many of the quotes are already in one person's favor over the others'.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I think perhaps the parents views are a little under presented, but they chose to remain silent, and so they didn't give the writer much to work with.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? I don't think it is actively persuasive, 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, although, I imagine, most of them will never be updated as many are quotes from people who no longer wish to comment, or who's last words were in their suicide note
 * 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? no
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? 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? yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? most are about removing as many instances as possible of the deadname of the trans person in the article, also some of them are about whether or not tumblr can be used as a source, but specifically, the post the person made on tumblr with their suicide note is what has been cited. It was published by the person the article is about, and has her last words, it is acceptable. There's also some transphobic comments
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? it's not rated as far as i can tell, no it's not a wiki project
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? it's about a person, rather than a general scientific topic, so it's got some different kinds of sources, and a different style of information. It's not about right, or factual, it's about as many honest details from the story as possible.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? semi protected, and good, should likely be left alone unless vert specific information needs to be changed (like the pronouns of the writer of the TV show transparent, which were changed"
 * What are the article's strengths? The ability to write unbiased, while including information which sounds quite biased
 * How can the article be improved? I don't think there's much that can be done
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I think it 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: it's at the end of the first discussion post, I don't know how to directly link it