User:Caffeinatedmicrobe/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]I chose it because it is our group's page for our project it matters because crabs are important drivers of biogeochemical activity. Initial impression is it was short and not in depth.
Evaluate the article
[edit]Lead: Doesn't give a summary of the article just is a short paragraph about the crabs.
Content: There is a lot of detail missing from the page and it feels quite general.
Tone: feels a bit informal but is otherwise neutral.
Sources: the sources seem good but the article is just lacking the full range of information found in the sources.
Organization: there are not enough sections as the page is brief.
Talk page: the only thing on the page is what I added it was rated low and needs work.
Overall: what is present is good work but it doesn't capture the full extent of the topic and needs many more sources and topics included in the article.