Jump to content

User:66.219.235.108/Evaluate an Article

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Evaluate an article

[edit]

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

  • Name of article: Veterans Day
  • Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
    • I visited many world war I sights this summer and learned of the significance of the poppy on armistice day throughout the United Kingdom. I desired to learn about the significance of this holiday in America and how we celebrate it.

Lead

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • 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? yes
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? concise

Lead evaluation: good

[edit]

Content

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
  • Is the content up-to-date? yes
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? potentially

Content evaluation

[edit]

very concise, could use more information

Tone and Balance

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • 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
  • Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

Tone and balance evaluation: good

[edit]

Sources and References

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? almost all
  • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?: No, many sources come from newspapers not scholarly sources
  • Are the sources current? yes
  • Check a few links. Do they work? yes

Sources and references evaluation: sub-par

[edit]

Organization

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • 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? not that I caught
  • Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? yes but not very many points

Organization evaluation

[edit]

Images and Media

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? no
  • 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? yes

Images and media evaluation: needs more and more relevant

[edit]

Checking the talk page

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? fixing poorly sourced, and agenda seeking statements
  • How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? I cannot see a rating. Yes
  • How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? focused on trivial matters such as use of apostrophe

Talk page evaluation: poor

[edit]

Overall impressions

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • What is the article's overall status? low
  • What are the article's strengths? includes history
  • How can the article be improved? needs more scholarly sources
  • How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? underdeveloped

Overall evaluation: mediocre

[edit]

Optional activity

[edit]
  • 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 — ~~~~

  • Link to feedback: