User:Yuyangz/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: Real-time transcription
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
 * I chose this article to evaluate because it is related to what we are studying in class.

Lead

 * Guiding questions
 * The Lead does include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic. The Lead does not include a brief description of the article's major sections. There aren't many sections in this article. The Lead does include information that is not present in the article. It does not elaborate on some of its topics such as "real-time transcription in broadcasting environment." It also does not introduce the "career opportunities" section. The Lead is not overly detailed but it is also not concise enough. There should be more information.


 * 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?

Content

 * Guiding questions
 * The article's content is relevant to the topic. The content is also up-to-date. All the contents belong to this topic, but there are a lot more that can be included in this article. For example, the history of real-time transcription and how it has changed throughout the history, or the important people related to this topic, or the required training for doing transcription, what softwares are required, etc.


 * 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?

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions
 * The article is not completely neutral. The article uses "typically" two times when introducing real-time transcription writers, which somehow reflects the writer's personal concluded opinion, instead of showing data from sources. A lot of the viewpoints are underrepresented and need further support. The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.


 * 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?

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions
 * In conclusion, this article has cited zero sources or references. There definitely should be constant citations throughout paragraphs and the writer should use reliable sources in the process of writing.


 * 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?

Organization

 * Guiding questions
 * The article is very easy to read because it is short and the language is easy to understand. There are virtually no grammatical or spelling errors. This article is not very well-organized, or it lacks organization. The only section on this topic is career opportunities, which does relate to the topic, but it definitely shouldn't be the only one.


 * 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?

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions
 * There are no images in this article.


 * 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?

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions
 * There's currently no conversations on the talk page. It has not been rated. It is the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. We haven’t discussed much on the topic of real-time transcription (in courtroom) in class. This article offers more information on its usage outside of courtroom.


 * 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?

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions
 * Overall the article is clear and very easy to read. It has bullet points to organize. However, it is underdeveloped. The article can be improved by using reliable sources and adding citations, which can also improve the tone of this article. It can also add more sections to cover more specific information and related topics on real-time transcription. A lot of the article's claims need more supporting and elaborating. It covers a lot information about career opportunities, but the main focus of the article should be on the actual development related to real-time transcription itself. Adding some images also helps. Overall, having no sources or references is the main issue.


 * 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?

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: