User:MillyPress/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]I am going into a human service profession. This gave me some starter knowledge on what the career might entail and how to minuver it.
Evaluate the article
[edit]Everything was relevant to this articles topic. I found it odd that their was a switch from just America information to North America and Canada. Nothing is out of date or missing. This article represents the historical assumption correct and is upto date on historical events. It could provide a diagram of this history of evolution in the field.
The tone of the article is neutral. I observed no biased claims.
I clicked on a few of the source links; the links all worked and went to credible nonbiased sites. They had an array of different sources from different authors, publications, and one from multiple different scholars.
In the talk page, there is some discussion on word choice and one resource link didn't work for the. This is park of Wiki Education and is part of an assignment.