User:Esand16/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: Pagophagia
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate
- I chose this article because the topic seemed interesting, and I wanted to learn more about it. Pagophagia is an eating disorder that doesn't get talked about often.

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?
- no
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?
- The most recent article cited is from 2008. More recent information might be available now.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- no
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
- no

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

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?
- the most current source is from 2008, which is 12 years old. More current information might be available
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- the sources seem diverse
Check a few links. Do they work?
- the link to the KidsHealth article doesn't work

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?
- no
Are images well-captioned?
- images were not included
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- images were not included
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- images were not included

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- none
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- start-class and mid-importance. It is part of WikiProject Medicine
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- we have not talked about this in class

What is the article's overall status?
- it is a moderate level article
What are the article's strengths?
- It uses good sources and explains the topic in a clear and concise way
How can the article be improved?
- Some more current sources would help add relevance to the topic
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- It is a little underdeveloped. The article is short and could benefit from some more current sources

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 — ~~~~