User:Tree79/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

Name of article: (History of geography)
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- I am in the process of becoming a history teacher and am interested in teaching geography.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes it clearly describes the topic.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- It hits on some but not all of the major sections of this topic.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- The article does not mention cartography as mentioned in the Lead.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- The Lead is concise and to the point.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- The article's content is relevant to the topic in question.
Is the content up-to-date?
- The content is up-to-date.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- All content seems to belong and there does not seem to be anything missing from the article.
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
- The article does have some underrepresented populations.

Is the article neutral?
- Yes, this article provides a neutral stance.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- There are no claims that appear heavily biased.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- There is little information shown for Egypt and Babylon.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- This is not a persuasive topic.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Sources appear to come from reliable journals and articles.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- The sources seen come from Encyclopedias, journals, and academic institutions.
Are the sources current?
- The sources appear to be current.
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Sources appear to come from a diverse group of individuals.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Links I have tried did work correctly.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- The article is very concise and easy to read.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- I did not see any grammatical or spelling errors within this article.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- This article is very well organized and reflects the major points of the topic.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- There are very few images included for this article.
Are images well-captioned?
- The images that are included are well-captioned.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Yes the images do adhere to copyright regulations.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- No, the images do not appear visually appealing.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- Discussion are going on as to what sections to add into the article.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- C-Class, it is part of the History of Science, wikiproject.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- Wikipedia does not dive deep into each piece included into the article. Much more could be added.

What is the article's overall status?
- It is listed as a Level-4 Vital Article in History.
What are the article's strengths?
- This article is divided well regarding content.
How can the article be improved?
- There are sub-pages of this article that could be elaborated on.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- This article is underdeveloped and has the potential to have much more information. The history of geography is focusing on only certain parts of the world.

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 — ~~~~