User:Kiany.pv/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: (link)Benefits of physical activity
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this topic because it caught my attention and I think it could be re-evaluated.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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]The article entitled "Physical activity" does not include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the articles topic (too general). The literature relating to obesity is massive, so it could be easily expanded and reinstated. It is quite clear and but not concise in the information.
Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
Content evaluation
[edit]The content of the article is revealing and the date is up to a recent date. Maybe there’s some content missing like the effect of excessive exercise like a precaution.
Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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]These article in specific attempt to persuade the reader in favor of doing physic activity.It isn’t written with a tone that provide an unbiased ,accurate, and proportionate representation of all postitions. It only focus on une point of view while it should be seen from two point of view so that the reader has the options to devalue then.
Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]All the facts in the article are backed up by reliable secondary source information.I check a few links and some weren’t updated.
Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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]The article was well-organized broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic .It is also concise , clear but not easy to read. There’s a lot of information and the lector can lose attention.
Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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]I recommend the use of images to sustain the topic and enhance understanding because the article doesn’t includes them.When places, they must be well-captioned and comply with copyright regulations.
Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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]This article is rated as a c-class topic and it up isn’t part of any wikiprojects.Wikipedia discusses this topic differ the way weve talked about in class in the matter of precise and detailed.It should little bit short with good content and centered in the main topic.
Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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]This article could be better developed , less information and more specific content.The articles strengths are the mention of all physic activitys’ brings to the human being.
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: