User:OSabates/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](Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)
I chose this particular article because it demonstrated the support that business outside of the government had for the protests. It gained momentum in places that one would suspect would be neglected.
Evaluate the article
[edit](Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)
Lead Section
- The introductory sentence does clearly state what the article will be about.
-The lead paragraph did do a good job of explaining the rest of the article.
-The lead does not include any information that is outside of the article.
-The lead is concise and not overly detailed.
Content
-the article is up to date and the topics are relevant
-there is not info that doesn't belong but there is information that is highlighted red.
-the information does involve a marginalized group.
Tone and Balance
-the article was neutral and did not try to persuade the reader in one direction or another
-it did not overrepresent/under represent any one topic
Sources and References
- I do believe that the information is enticing, however, the source are not majority from online journals from the Jerusalem post and timesofisrael.com
-there could definitely be a more wide array of reputable sources.
Writing Quality
-The article was well written, very through, and concise
Images and Media
-I do believe the images to be pertinent to the information and placed correctly, however to of them are not accredited to a certain source.
Overall Impression
- I overall thought that it was a really interesting and well written article.