User:Yomeezy7/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: Malaria
 * This article is relevant to my field of study at the University of Houston and I am also fascinated by the disease since it is still a big problem in many parts of the world today.


 * 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

 * Yes the lead includes all of the necessary components. It has a strong introductory sentence and it gives a clear description of malaria. The lead also describes the major sections of the article and gives a brief description of each section. The lead is also concise and does a good job of quickly summarizing malaria.

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
The article's content is relevant to the topic and all of the content is up to date. I was able to learn a lot about the topic even though I have already covered it in university classes. There did not seem to be any content that was missing and I did not see any content that did not belong in the article.

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
The tone of the article seems to be neutral and there do not seem to be any claims that are heavily biased. I did not see any viewpoints that are overrepresented in the article since it mostly contains scientific information. I did not feel like the article tried to persuade the reader in any particular fashion, the article focused mostly on informing the reader,

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
All the major facts in the articles had a reliable secondary source of information. There were sources throughout the article and they seem to reflect the available literature on the topic. The majority of the sources were current and all of the links that I tested worked.

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
The article flows well and was easy to follow. It was also super informative and did not seem to contain any grammatical or spelling errors. The way that the article is broken down into sections improves the flow of the article and its clarity.

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
There are many images and tables that enhance the reader's understanding of the topic. The images and tables are well captioned and the images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations. All of the images are appealing to the eye and capture the reader's attention.

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
All of the discussions on the talk page are supportive and the majority of the conversations involve people offering constructive criticism or asking educational questions. The article is part of multiple WikiProjects and has been deemed a high importance or top importance article for each WikiProject. Wikepedia approached the topic differently by covering the topic more holistically than how it was covered in class.

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 article is listed as a level 3 vital article in Health and Medicine. The article does a great job of educating the reader on malaria and it very concise and easy to follow. The one thing I would suggest to improve the article would be to include more images and tables to make the article flow even better. The article is well-developed ad I would recommend it to others.

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: