User:VGoldenrose/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: Digital Divide in the United States (Digital divide in the United States)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * Seems interesting to improve the article

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * yes it does
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * It does
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * It seems to cover the Lead's description
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise
 * The lead is concise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes it is.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * there isn't up to date content.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * yes the contents are too closely paraphrased.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It does deal with this.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It does deal with this.
 * It does deal with this.

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?
 * Social Capital and education attainment could be represented more with more information.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * This article seems neutral
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * This article seems neutral
 * This article seems neutral

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * most of the information is no longer reliable
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * it reflects the topic, but has some non - free copyright materials
 * Are the sources current?
 * no.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * They do.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * They do.
 * They do.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Wikipedia flags the article saying some parts of the article may be hard to read.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * It seems to be ok from what I've seen.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes.
 * 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 it does
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes they are.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, clicking the pictures the images are clear.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * I feel like this could be done better and that there can be more pictures.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * I feel like this could be done better and that there can be more pictures.
 * I feel like this could be done better and that there can be more pictures.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Lack of definition/Good statistical data/external links modified/too much irrelevant information/information people deleted
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * has been a part of wiki projects. mostly B's and 1 C
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It just highlights everything wrong.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It just highlights everything wrong.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Overall status needs a great deal of work.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Strengths are statistics, but the stats are now outdated.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * The article can be improved with more relevant information.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It's poorly developed and needs some work.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * It's poorly developed and needs some work.
 * It's poorly developed and needs some work.

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: