User:Vsanchez8/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]Our course introduces students to the theory and practice of archival thinking, and frames current approaches to caring for increasingly complex, multimedia, and heterogeneous information. Archival work is an important task within libraries.
Evaluate the article
[edit]The lead to this articles provides a clear and concise introductory sentence, with a brief description of the article's major sections. The lead is a total of four paragraphs, and provides adequate amount of information to inform the reader of the what to expect in the article.
The article has received an B class article grade, in that it is mostly complete and without major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. The article's topic is explained well and in detail, with the rest of the articles broken up into separate sections for each sub-topic mentioned. The article includes in-line citations providing additional links to additional information/resources. Article was created in October of 2002.
Many revisions and updates have been made to the article since it was created, including several external links have been updated or modified, missing information that was left out of the history, and the updating of the article images are just a handful of the many that were mentioned in the Talk section.
Due to the ever changing components of the Library, and the diverse history of the institutions, I beleive this article will continue to be a work in progress and always require some further work.