User:LBrew1/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A 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.

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
Is the content up-to-date?
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia 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.

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

A 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.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Are the sources current?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Images and Media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
Are images well-captioned?
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Talk page discussion

The 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.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

What is the article's overall status?
What are the article's strengths?
How can the article be improved?
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Examples of good feedback

A 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.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?

Online communication between school and home

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I chose to evaluate this article because I think that it is extremely relevant not only to our class regarding communication but also to the upcoming group of students who have lived their whole lives with digital communication. I also think that my schooling when I was younger would have been helped if my parents had access to my teachers and every assignment I turned in. This would also help my parents understand what exactly I was learning in school and be able to help if there were things that I did not understand. I thought this was an important part of communication that we haven't really touched upon in class.

Evaluate the article

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS

Overall I feel as though this article has a good information and is a very important topic that could be expanded upon greatly. I would say the strengths of this page are that it touches on the main points of digital communication between parents, students and teachers. It has a great list of benefits as-well as a good list of potential issue that could arise during this process. Some ways that I think this article can be improved would be adding more useful sources and statistics, I feel as though there are content gaps in the benefits section and I think the reader would benefit from a source or study stating how important it can be for students to have their parents involved in their schooling. I feel like there is an imbalanced section when comparing the pros and cons as I feel as though the benefits significantly outweigh the negatives when it comes to student, parent and teacher communication especially when a child is young. There are also some gaps in sourcing that I feel as though would benefit from an actual statistic, when it states "Online communication increases parents’ understanding of classroom procedures, philosophies and policies. Parents then feel more involved in their child's school and more connected to the teacher. In general, online communication improves parents’ attitudes toward conferencing with teachers and administrators." it does have a source which makes it more credible but I do feel like a statistic would greatly enhance the information given from a readers perspective. I would say that this article is underdeveloped just because there is so much more information that can be enhanced and expanded upon in the article especially regarding communication between teachers and parents. I do like the amount of sources the article has but the more sources the more credible I would find the article. Overall I think that this article could be a great resource to parents and teachers alike if this article is cleaned up and expanded upon.

LEAD SECTION

I believe that this article has a good lead section, it addresses the main points of what the article is about and does it in a concise way and addresses the topic at hand. It could mention that it compares and contrasts the benefits and challenges of having this communication. I do not think this lead has any information that is not in the article or is to long.

CONTENT

I think this article has some very good points when it comes to the topic at hand, I would say that all the information that is given is relevant to the topic but I think that there is alot more information that could be added to this page. As mentioned in the overall impressions section I think that if this article used more statistics to backup some of their claims that it would make the information alot more valuable to the reader. The article does touch on some of the equality gaps when it mentions that there could be a language barrier between the parents and teachers as well as it mentions that it is possible that some of the families involved might not have constant access to wifi.

TONE AND BALANCES

This topic is very non biased I would say but more informational, it addresses the problems that could occur with this process as well as states the benefits. It does not take a particular side but really just compares each of the pros and cons of this type of communication.

SOURCES

I think that there are a-lot of accurate sources in this article and I would not say that this part needs to be improved. There could be more updated sources as the most updated source is from 2010, and there are quite a few sources from the 90s which are a little outdated. I find it hard to believe that there are not studies on this topic as we have had to do school fully online over the last two years.

ORGANIZATION AND IMAGES

There were not any grammatical errors that I found but I will say that this is not exactly my strong suit. When I was reading the article I thought that it was well written and I did not find the article to hard to read or understand. The biggest issue that may arise is that there are no images in the page at, I think adding some pictures to spice up the page and make it more visually appealing would help the overall page itself. I think event pictures of students in the classroom or even a network sign something that could help add images to all the information that is given.