User:Alyssagpp/Evaluate an Article
 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.
Sources and ReferencesA Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved. |
Which article are you evaluating?
[edit]Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit](Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)
I have chosen this article to evaluate because I believe that in it's current state, it is missing a lot of important information. The article is very short, and although the article provides a kind of structural framework (outlined in the "categories" subheading), there isn't any follow up information or research to fill out the article.
Evaluate the article
[edit](Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)
Lead Section
The lead section is very concise and streamlined. I believe that is has all of the necessary components to holistically explain what outreach is, what its primary purpose is, and the ways in which outreach can be modified to adapt to certain conditions and needs. It does not describe the articles major sections.
Content
The content seems relevant and up-to-date, although in general this article does not have enough information. It does not directly deal with Wikipedia's equity gaps- the entire article is about underrepresented populations, but it does not break down the historic roots of why and how these groups came to be, and what the demographic breakdown of these populations might be. I do however believe that this is not necessarily the articles duty- there are other articles on wikipedia that already cover this information. I think it could be helpful to mention and hyperlink these relevant articles.
The tone, sources, and writing quality look good. I think my contribution to this article will be reorganizing it and outlining the different types of outreach in a more effective and concise way, and filling out these outlined portions. I will also consider adding meaningful images that relate to each subsector.