User:Wkres/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: Minimalism
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * This seems like a good example of how an article might balance detail and concision.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * The lead gives a concise description of the article's contents, relating it to other trends and introducing significant artists associated with the movement.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * The lead does cover the article's major sections (i.e., minimalism's influence on various media).
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * The lead is careful to include only information presented in the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is very concise, as it should be.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * All of the article's content is relevant to the topic. It adheres closely to the lead paragraphs and shows a logical structure detailing the influence of modernism in various media.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * It is up-to-date.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * From what I can tell, no content appears to be missing, and all of the content does belong to the subject.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * The article is generally neutral.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Nothing in the article appears biased toward any position, nor does it try to make any sort of biased argument.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * The article has been flagged for underrepresenting minimimalism in UI design.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * The article does not try to persuade the reader to any one position.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * The article is sufficiently backed up by reliable secondary sources.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * The sources are representative of the available literature.
 * Are the sources current?
 * The sources could be more current; but they are representative of the literature, so the fact that they are not exactly up-to-date might be worth less than their being notable sources of information.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * All of the links I checked work.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * The article is concise, clear, and readable.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * It does not seem to 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?
 * The article is organized well: it divides its discussion into logical parts.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Most of the sections include an image that clarifies the sense of the topic.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * All images give essential information that documents the works depicted.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * All of the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright policy.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * The images are right-justified and do not interfere with the readability of the text.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Its conversations mostly deal with inclusion of various other topics: e.g., minimalism in philosophy, sections that might need greater clarification, and formatting of images/text.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is part of philosophy, visual arts, and architecture WikiProjects.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * N/A.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * Generally, the article is well-written, and the information presented is consistently backed by secondary sources.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is very readable/navigable.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Certain sections might be collapsed: e.g., "Software and UI design" into "Minimalist design and architecture."
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * The article seems mostly complete, although there does appear to be some discussion of developing the "Software and UI design" section further.

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: