User:Wsargent99/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: Sports betting
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I believe sports betting is closely related to sports analytics and I believe sports analytics have major implications around the future of sports gambling.

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?
 * no
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * It is relatively concise although I don't believe the information included is all the most relevant information.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * I think the article should've included more about the books that currently exist and are popular in England for example such as PaddyPower and others.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * no

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * no

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * yes
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * yes
 * Are the sources current?
 * yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * no
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * yes

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?
 * no
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * yes

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * no
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * no
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * yes
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * no

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * One conversation suggests they link various sports betting tools to the article. Other conversations include critiques about the article itself, its format, as well as clearing up some confusion some readers had.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * The article is rated as C-class. It is part of WikiProject Sports, as well as WikiProject Gambling.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We haven't extensively covered it yet in class but this article looks at sports gambling less from an analytical perspective and more from a viability and legal perspective. The article also focuses on the history of sports gambling and the important concepts to understand in sports gambling.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I think it is a well put together and informative article, but not complete.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It fully covers sports betting in America, and goes into good detail with the concepts involved in sports betting, and oddsmaking and legality are both developed well.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * I think it needs to develop sports betting outside of the US more, and provide more detail and clarity on bookmaking.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I think its well-developed, but like I mentioned before, not completely.

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: