User:Toffeeeee12345/Evaluate an Article
Which article are you evaluating evaluating?
[edit]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_coral
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]It seemed like a good article to edit and add things to to make it better.
Evaluate the article
[edit]- Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes
- Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Yes
- Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
- It has a bit of information not in the article.
- Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- It is concise
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes
- Is the content up-to-date?
- No it needs to be updated .
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Some information referenced in the lead is missing.
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
- Yes.
- Is the article neutral?
- Yes
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- No
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- No
- Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
- I am not sure
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- No
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Yes
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes
- Are the sources current?
- No
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Yes
- Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
- Yes
- Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- No
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Yes
- Are images well-captioned?
- Yes
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Yes
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- It looks good enough
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- There are none
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- It is a c-class and it is apart of the animals WikiProjects
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- It needs updating
- What is the article's overall status?
- Some of the information in the article needs updating so it can be better
- What are the article's strengths?
- How the information is presented
- How can the article be improved?
- Using new and updated sources
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- I feel like it’s underdeveloped
Which article are you evaluating?
[edit](Provide a link to the article here.)
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.)
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.)