User:Cshehan/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A 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.

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? (It shouldn't.)
Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

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?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia 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.

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

A 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.

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?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

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

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?

Talk page discussion

The 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.

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

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?

Examples of good feedback

A 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.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?

Ranch

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I chose this article because ranching has a big part in my life and my future. The article is well written with a diverse and detailed history of the topic.

Evaluate the article

The lead section of the article gives a good introduction of the topic. It talks well about the main points of the article and transitions to the individual topics in a smooth way. The lead section gives a good base to build knowledge off of. It also gives good basic statements if a reader did not want to read the whole article. The content of the article is well written and well diversified. It is unbiased to one location or belief when it talked about origins and operation of the ranches and types of ranching. It was very descriptive and answered any questions a reader might have. The article does not fail to give information in regard to different locations of the world and the origins of ranching. The article remains unbiased without and the tone is informative and does not lean to a certain belief or opinion on ranching. There are 12 great sources spanning over many years that keep the article up to date and give detailed information from plenty of time-frames and progression over time about the topic. The sources chosen are great insights on the topic and are well written. The article is well written and organized in a way that progresses through the history of the topic. The flow of the page keeps the reader interested and easy to understand. There are no apparent grammatical errors or obvious problems with the quality of the article. The images on the article are well chosen and give further insight into the topic and the history that is written in the article. The images are placed well through the article and have great detail. This article is rated at a Level 5, which means it is of high importance. The article is part of five other wikiprojects, two of which are of high importance. The article is rated important because the topic has a great deal to do with basic history and the functionality of societies. The articles overall status is of high importance and every evolving to be improved to give further information. The article has many strengths, especially when it comes to the origins of the topic. The only way it could be improved is if there could be further history found to support and inform on the topic. I would say this article is complete and well-developed.~~~~