User:Violetzq/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: American Vegan Society
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * This is a C-class article, so there might be somethings that we can work on to improve, and we are interested in animal rights

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * It is somewhat concise, but not clear enough
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, but it basically is just a list of sub-titles. So it might need more details
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is somewhat concise, but need a more detailed description of what the Vegan Society is.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * It is relevant but lack of logic connection between each sections
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * no, it does not include enough contents that are relevant to recent events.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * no, but more details are needed

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?
 * there are some viewpoints that are underrepresented
 * 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?
 * no
 * Are the sources current?
 * no
 * 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?
 * The "activities" section needs more details instead of just a list of activities. and the convention part also needs more information, and it's content is not clear enough
 * 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?
 * no, the article needs to be broken down into more sections

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * yes
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * no
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * no, there is a copyright problem
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * no

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 is a discussion about the images' copyright problem; and some editors added more contents to the article
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-class, and t's part of the Wikiprojects United States
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * it is not clear enough and does not include enough information, and it probably cannot attract a lot of readers

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * C-class
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is unbiased and concise
 * How can the article be improved?
 * more details are needed, and the facts need to be checked
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * it is underdeveloped

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: