User:WCultProject/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: Matchmaking
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen this article because this is a topic that I think is interesting. And I wanted to know more about it. And my partner agreed with this article too.

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
We have an introductory sentence to explain us the process of matchmaking and that we can use the term in other context. We don’t have anything else. We should have the definition of the term. We have a list of the contents. But not a brief description of the major sections. No, we don’t have information that are not in the article The Lead is really concise, there is no details in it. We should improve this part, and removed some details as the part about the other uses of matchmaking in sport and business.

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
I think the article’s content is relevant to the topic, because it gave us information about how matchmaking is in other culture. I don’t think the part about astrologer is relevant or necessary in this article (when I read it, I just don’t understand why we talk about that here), or not in this part.

Yes the content is up-to-date, but not from people that use good sources or informations.

We don’t know exactly the historical part of the topic. When it start ? Where (there is always a starting point). We could add information about how does it change in some culture (in some countries it’s not legal, in other it is…). The methods part needs to be improved, we need to add information about it, maybe methods from other countries, other cultures.

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
In most part yes the article is neutral. But sometimes I think that we have the idea of the author (the paragraph that start with: the influence of such people…).I don’t see any viewpoints that are overrepresented or underrepresented. And I don’t think the article attempt to persuade the reader. It's just information that people found intresting. The part about Asia should be removed too because information inside it are not sufficient to create a single part about what is the method in Asia.

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
The facts in the article come from secondary sources. Only two sources are from books, one is from the NYT, and the others are from websites that don’t look good, or trustworthy in my opinion.

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
We think the article is well-writing, we have different paragraphs, it’s clear. As a non-native for me there is not apparent grammatical or spelling errors. I don’t think it’s well-organized, there is no transition between the paragraph. It’s just different information one after the other. We should remove the Other Uses part because we don't think it's relevant here. And we should create an historical/origin part too. Finally, we think that the practice part need to be modified.

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
I think images are not the best for the topic, the first one is not rellay appropriated for the topic and those after are not relevant. They respect the copyright regulations because when you click on the like bellow images you can find the date, the sources...

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
Some people ask to add information about other culture about matchmaking (Ireland). The article is a part of 5 WikiProject

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 overall status of the article is in progress. There is a lot to improve. The introduction is quite good I think, and there is some information that we can keep. But there is no historical background, and we don’t know much about the topic (matchmaking), we know how do they use it in business, the methods part deserves to be improved, some other part I think should be removed. I think the article is poorly developed.

 My Partner is : CatherineGinn2023 

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: