User:Cocoa2021/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 chose this article as we are learning about this subject in my class, and as well because I saw there were many additional details that needed to be added to this page. This article matters as not a lot of people know about this specific aspect and has the wrong thoughts/ideas about human evolution. So, I want to help show the truth about human evolution, as I have learned a lot about it, this year.My preliminary impression is that it did contain a lot of details about the subject, yet it does not reference or cite where they got this information.
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.)
The introductory sentence does not clearly state what it is, and to to specifically address what this page will talk about. It does not give a brief description of the sections. I think the lead is very concise, it does not go into major details. The article is relevant today, as it has been updated recently.The tone of this article is neutral and informative of the period. However, it lacks citation and reference throughout the article. As well, it does not define different key terms nor aspects in the page. It briefly goes over different aspects in this period, but in a broad sense. I do believe everything is needed for this page, but there should contain more research papers and articles that detail this period. As well, the sources they cited, are well-informed for this page. It is easy to read and didn't have much spelling errors. There are images that showcased the page, and they all seemed to be cited correctly. The article can be improved by citations, and going into depth about this topic. The article was rated very low, as it lacked references.