User:LKL88/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]
I chose this article because it relates highly to the course content. It is very important because it explains a global phenomena's history in a localized region. The article appears to cover a broad area of topics, but is severely lacking in citations.
Evaluate the article[edit]
The lead section includes an overview that well introduces the article. It doesn't contain an outline of the different sections that follow. It is very concise.
The content appears to be relevant and accurate.
The article is neutral.
There is an absence of adequate and appropriate sources. Some referenced sources don't indicate date of access.
The article is concise, clear, and well-organized.
Article is severly lacking in images.Most recent Talk page discussion is from 2016. This article is part of the Correction and Detention Facilities and Japan WikiProjects.
The article provides a good baseline understanding of the topic. The article lacks appropriate references and citations. It is underdeveloped, but with better sourcing can be improved immensely.
Which article are you evaluating?[edit]
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?[edit]
This article is deeply related to my topic of Meiji imperialism in Hokkaido. Abashiri Prison is a main location where political prisoners were sent.
Evaluate the article[edit]
The lead section includes an overview that well introduces the article. It doesn't contain an outline of the different sections that follow. It is very concise.
The content appears to be relevant and accurate, although the historical section is quite brief.
The article is neutral.
There could certainly be more citations, especially academic ones.
The article is concise, clear, and well-organized.
Article contains images, talk page is empty. This article is part of WikiProject Japan, and supported by the law and government task force. This article is also part of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities.
The article provides a good baseline understanding of the topic. It is underdeveloped, but with better sourcing can be improved immensely.