User:Wikialice1010/sandbox

I chose to evaluate the article about (Bobo doll experiment). The concept this article covers had been covered in class and the concept of how media affects us amazed me.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes the intro sentence clearly states the topic.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Yes it clearly describes the most pertinent parts of the article.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, the lead includes information from throughout the entire article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead isn't overly detailed, its of a good length and concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the articles content is relevant directly to the topic.
 * Is the content up-to-date? The article's most recent source is from 2006, so I would say it isn't completely up to date and could be freshened up a bit.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Yes, there are cited sources missing, and conclusions that have been drawn without existing proof.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? No it does not.
 * Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No it doesn't address topics related to historically underrepresented populations.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? The article is neutral, however there are some conclusions that are missing proof, so they could be false and biased by the author of them.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are claims biased to the position that the children included in Bandura's experiments were traumatized due to being taunted by the researches and sustained damage from that event yet in reality the children were left alone. So someone drew the wrong conclusion.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, otherwise the experiment is represented normally and neutral.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? It doesn't attempt to persuade the reader in favour of either position, but the one claim about the children sustaining abuse could.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No, there are quite a couple missing sources and conclusions drawn without backup.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The earliest source dates back from 2006 so, no.
 * Are the sources current? No, the sources are not current.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Yes, the sources have diverse authors. Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? No, they do not.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? SOme do work, some don't.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is well written in some passages, others are confusing or have unnecessary rambles.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No, it doesn't have grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, it's well organized.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? It has two images, and needs more to properly enhance understanding of the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned? They could use some more description.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? No it does not.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? No they are not, and also depict violence which is against wikipedia guidelines.

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 are tons of discussions about the weak presentation of this topic and the lack of sources and information.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is of mid-importance and is of C-scale.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It covers it more in depth than we did in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? I agree it's of a C grading.
 * What are the article's strengths? It is well organized and has good chucks of information.
 * How can the article be improved? It needs more information, sources, some reworking and more images that are well cited.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is underdeveloped, it just needs some work but the material is there for people to work with.

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: