User:Whook17/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: Biblical languages
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * This article was short and simple to understand. I found it by clicking on the academic disciplines category

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Sort of. The two major sections are language of the hebrew bible, and languages of the new testament, and though they are not mentioned explicitly, the content of the two major sections is mentioned in the lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * the lead mentions debates about proper translations that are not mentioned in the text.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * the lead is quite concise and effective.

Lead evaluation
lead is mostly solid

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * the content is relevant to the topic
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * as the original languages of the bible haven't changed in awhile, the content is up to date
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * there may be room for a discussion about the debates regarding certain translations

Content evaluation
content is clear and sufficient

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * there is no evidence of any biased claims or slanted opinions.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * all viewpoints seem to have equal representation
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * it is a neutral article

Tone and balance evaluation
neutral and balanced. very emotionless. like a robot. good job.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * there is only one source, and it is not cited in text, but only referenced at the end
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * there is only one source
 * Are the sources current?
 * the source is not linked and does not provide a date
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * source is not linked,

Sources and references evaluation
sourcing and referencing is far below par

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * not that I could find
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes

Organization evaluation
organization is well done

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * only one image used, but on an article about languages images aren't exactly necessary.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * the image is not captioned, but it doesn't necessarily need to be.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * probably
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * it is in a normal spot for a wikipedia picture

Images and media evaluation
not a while lot of images, but there doesn't need to be

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * some dude is talking about a movie called "the asgard race", seems to not speak very good english. Very high level discussion.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * rated start class, mid to low importance in bible, greece, and linguistics
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * discussions in class actually make sense, this talk page is atrocious

Talk page evaluation
garbage

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * it seems to be underdeveloped
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * it is a clear and unbiased view of the topic
 * How can the article be improved?
 * more sources to consider would improve it
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * it does not seem to have enough sources to be seen as complete.

Overall evaluation
this article could use some information from different sources.

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: