User:VANESSAzyy/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: Fandom
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

-I chose this artice to evaluate because I initially want to do my project on Fandom, but discovered it already has a well-established wiki page. I think this article covers many of the aspects under this main topic while there also some places where I think can be improved or further clarified.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Lead evaluation
-The Lead generally gives a comprehensive introduction of what will be described in the article. However, it doesn't include how fandom is depicted in media and how it relates to indursty which is included in the article at the very end. Some topics mentioned in the introduction don't develop in the article. And the Lead includes detailed description of various conventions at the end, which is overly detailed and can be further disussed in following paragraphs.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Content evaluation
-Yes, all the content is relevant to the topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Tone and balance evaluation
-yes it is neutral.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
-Some definitions and activities don't have sources to support, plus some of the sources are from social media or news report.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Organization evaluation
-all the relationship with industry are fan activties are in one long paragraphs which make the content hard to read. and the "in books" "in film" sections can b grouped under one large section.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Images and media evaluation
-it doeas have some images, but not very represntative and comprehensive.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Talk page evaluation
-the definition of fandom is quite narrow focusing on sci-fi.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * 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?

Overall evaluation
-the article can be improved by adding more sub-headings to make the outline more clear. It can also broaden the definition of fandoms. For some topics mentioned in the lead but not further developed in the main article should be discussed more carefully.

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: