User:LS1701/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: (link) Environmental science
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I have chosen to evaluate this article because I am a biology major and I would love to learn more about environmental science.
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 and it also links them
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, but it does mention the enlightenment and links it for further information
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise
Lead evaluation[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? No
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? It is not one of Wikipedia's equity gaps
Content evaluation[edit]
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[edit]
Sources and References[edit]
- Guiding questions
- 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? Yes
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes
- Check a few links. Do they work? Yes
Sources and references evaluation[edit]
Organization[edit]
- Guiding questions
- 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?
Organization evaluation[edit]
Images and Media[edit]
- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
- 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[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?
- 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?
Talk page evaluation[edit]
Overall impressions[edit]
- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status? Vital Level 5
- What are the article's strengths? Great overall summary of environmental science and the components of it.
- How can the article be improved? Maybe a a few more photos of people taking action in the environment.
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Well developed and written
Overall evaluation[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: