User:Vpritchard/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.


 * Foxhound: (Foxhound)
 * I have chosen to evaluate this article because it is a stub article and therefore it provides an opportunity to be able to learn about the topic and provide greater explanation/information about the topic for the page.

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 is concise and provides general introductory details about foxhounds as foxhounds are a general "blanket term" for a type/breeds of dog. The lead includes specific breeds of foxhounds as examples and clarifies how in their native countries, the dogs are just called foxhounds.

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?
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation
The article's content is relevant to the topic as it includes common causes of death and disposition of this type of dog, and even notable foxhounds. Content that is missing include citations as well as there being an overall lack of information on the topic. Therefore, more research and time can be spent to add content to the page. For example, more on the disposition and habits of this type of dog as well as history and context. This article does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps and it does not address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics.

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
The article is neutral in that there does not appear to be biased views or claims heavily based toward a particular position. There is not a lot of information, so it could seem like things/aspects are underrepresented due to them being left out. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.

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?
 * 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?

Sources and references evaluation
The facts are backed up by sources that are not all scholarly. Some sources are from news articles and blog posts. I feel that the sources are not all thorough and do not reflect the available literature on the topic, as I think there is a lot more literature out there on this topic. The sources vary in some being current and others being older, but because the information is very generic and does not change with time, I understand that older sources may not impact it negatively. The sources are from a diverse spectrum as some are from scholarly sources of books and writings and some are from The American Kennel Club, magazines, or blogposts. The links all seem to work except for one.

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
The article is well-written as it is clear, concise, and easy to read. There are no grammatical or spelling errors, and the article is well-organized and broken down into sections that reflect major points of the topic, although I feel there can be more depth in the information provided as well as in the topics mentioned.

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
The article includes an image that enhances the understanding of the topic and it is well-captioned. However, I think it would be best to include images of other types of foxhounds as they do vary in look/attributes. This would also allow for greater representation and inclusion of the foxhounds native to other countries instead of just America. The image is laid out in an appealing way as it is at the top when you first open the page.

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 conversations on the talk page are minimal as there are only 3 messages. The ideas are to add another notability as well as adding information about British Ministry purchasing foxhounds to increase their number of foxhounds. The article is rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale, and High-Importance on the project's importance scale. The article is part of the WikiProject Dogs.

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's overall status is that it is a start-class and needs development. The article's strengths are that it links to other Wikipedia pages that are part of the group and allow for expansion on the topic. The article can be improved in that it provides more history and background of foxhounds and the "types." I would assess the article as needing more information and depth on the topic. It is underdeveloped, but it has a good framework at this time.

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: