User:AaronAspelund/Evaluate an Article

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: Badminton in the United States
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate
- I chosen this article because I have always had a passion for sports( I love sports) and this was the closest article that I could find to sports.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- No. The topic sentence is very vague.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- No it does not
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- No, the lead is one sentence saying that Badminton is not popular in the United states in comparison to tennis.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- VERY CONCISE

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes it is relevant but very minimal
Is the content up-to-date?
- Yes
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Lots of missing content

Is the article neutral?
- Yes the article is very neutral.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- There is no bias the information provided is fact straight
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- There are not enough view points. There are a total of 5 sentences max on this article page.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- Maybe alittle. It says tennis is more popular than badminton but that statement is backed up with a source.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- They are backed up by the reliable secondary source yes.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- They appear to be thorough but they could be updated or use better sources
Are the sources current?
- Some sources are out of date.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes some of the links work!

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes very easy to read. Very short
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- No errors
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes it is broken into 3 sections

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- No there are no images
Are images well-captioned?
- No images
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- No images
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- No images

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- No conversations behind the scenes
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- The article is rated as Start-Class. It is low importance on the Wiki-project scale.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- N/A

What is the article's overall status?
- The article is a young article that need a lot more details. There are maybe 200 words max on the page.
What are the article's strengths?
- Organized, concise and easy to read
How can the article be improved?
- More detial
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- Underdeveloped

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 — ~~~~