User:Z-VanS/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 in Austin Texas
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

My parents recently moved to Texas, so I was curious to explore something related.

Lead

 * 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
The lead focuses immediately on a single team, the team that will soon be the first major league team, as opposed to a more general view of teams in Austin. The lead includes a contents tab, but does not include any description of the sections that follow within the text. There is no information not contained later in the text, and could be described as overly concise.

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 content of the article seems to be generally up to date, but the relevance of some of the topics covered is more of a stretch than others. A distinction might need to be made between professional athletics teams and other competitions or activities available in the area.

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 article overall is fairly neutral, but many of the sections feel as though they were written by an individual with particular investment in the activity or team they were writing about, in exclusion of others. The article generally feels disjointed.

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
Many facts and figures lack proper citation, namely attendance figures, as well as other statements scattered throughout the piece. Some of the sources cited seem to lack direct relevance to the sentence they are cited in. many sources are old, but mostly pertain to older information so this would make sense. All the links I tried seemed to work.

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
As stated earlier, the article often feels disjointed, written by a number of different opinions with focus on small aspects of the article. the organization is unclear, especially because the expectations for content are not laid out at the beginning of the article.

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?

The article contains few images, but the images that are present are relevant and well captioned. With so few images, layout seems mostly unimportant.

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
The article is C-class, low importance, as part of bot a Sports project and an Austin Texas project. There is a single comment in the talk section from a bot, requesting feedback on an added link.

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 seems to lack a clear purpose or unifying idea, but contains many tidbits of potentially useful information, just not necessarily all relevant. The article needs to be clarified and restructured.

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: Here