User:Debbie RT/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: Pragmatics
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Because it is important for me to understand the basis of Pragmatics.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
- The article talks about the subject in a concise way. It mentions subcategories related to the topic, and although it does not give a detailed explanation, it offers links to consult these terms.
- 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
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- The article is up-to-date and has content that is relevant to the topic. It covers basic points, but it also has deeper content in the matter.
- 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
[edit]Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- The article is neutral, in general. There may be some sentences that can be biased towards certain resolutions. For instance, "Without knowing the context, the identity of the speaker or the speaker's intent, it is difficult to infer the meaning with certainty."
- 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
[edit]Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Not all links seem to come from reliable sources, study.com for example. Likewise, there are links that no longer exist or that redirects to other pages.
- 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
[edit]Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- It is well written, however, it could improve the understanding of some paragraphs if they formed more subcategories or sub-paragraphs to understand the topics and sub-topics of the subject.
- 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
[edit]Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- The article has only one image. It helps to understand the subcategory that is presented. I think it could be added more images to understand the subject, especially to explain structures or examples.
- 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?
Images and media evaluation
[edit]Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
- The article is part of some WikiProjects and has a C-Class rating
- 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
[edit]Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Overall, I think it's okay. It has some inconsistencies when reading; the examples are not well defined and the structure in general could be improved.
- 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
[edit]Optional activity
[edit]- 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: