User:JaCU2023/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]Iv'e chosen this article for multiple of reasons: I myself am trying to practice self-love , my project is creating a support group surrounding self-love.
Evaluate the article
[edit]This article has a strong lead; it not only lets you know what you are going to be reading but it also gives you a clear definition on what self-love is. It’s not overly detailed, it gives you the perfect amount of information.The content is very relatable to the article and is up to date , while reading i didn't feel as though i was being stirred in a different direction. I felt as though it seemed as if it was a POV of self-love in different lights or what it meant to them, definitely neutral. It just seems that there's no one specific answer for self-love. The facts in this article are all backed up by reliable sources . The links on the article work but some of them were bringing me to the same page twice almost like something was put twice. Although some things were linked twice the article was clear to read and was very organized . On the talk page there's a lot of talk about self-love not being narcissism , self-love is self-esteem. The article was rated as C-Class and Mid-Importance . I think overall the article was good , I knew what i was reading and everything was explained . This article was well developed.