User:Low10High10/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

• Name of article: Foreign Language
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
  • I chose to evaluate this article because it is related to the current course I am taking: Introduction to Linguistics. Additionally, it is something that is relevant to most people as many spend some time in their lives trying to learn a foreign

Lead

Guiding questions

• 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?
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation

This article's lead starts off with a nice introductory sentence which does a good job of explaining the topic of foreign language is a short manner. The lead brushes through parts of the sections inside the article, but doesn't explicitly give a description for each section. Most of the information presented in the introduction is further talked about in later parts of the article. Overall, the lead is concisely done and it gives a good overview of Foreign Language.

Content

Guiding questions

• 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?

Content evaluation

The article's content contains relevant information to foreign language. Most of the content seems somewhat up to date. The article contains sections related to research of Foreign language and some of the research is from many years ago. It may be better to find potentially updated research or newer studies for better content. Besides some potentially old research, the rest of the content all relevant to the topic. This article doesn't address historically underrepresented topics.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

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

Tone and balance evaluation

This article contains neutral content as it mainly discusses the topic and talks about research done. There are times the article makes statements towards a position, but it does so in a unbias manner by showing both sides. For example, at one point the article discusses how it is believed that children can learn a foreign language easier than adults. It then goes on to also talk about other research which have proven the opposite, where adults are shown to learn foreign languages better.

Sources and References

Guiding questions

• 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?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

The article does a good job of referencing other sources of information when making statements related to research. The sources are also taken from a wide collection of resources and different locations. For the most part, the sources are not very current. The links all work, but half of them are archived articles that are no longer being updated from their source. The sources are not from historically marginalized individuals.

Organization

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

Overall, the article is pretty well written as its easy to read and understand. The one part that seemed a little too much was the section about Foreign Language vs Second Language. This felt like it needed to be more concise at parts and was a little too long of a section. I did not find any grammatical or spelling errors in this article. The sections are well marked and broken down in a nicely organized manner.

Images and Media

Guiding questions

• 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?

Images and media evaluation

This article does not include any images.

Checking the talk page

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

Inside the talk page, there are couple of conversations that went on for the article. One conversation was about someone's personal experience of foreign language not being offered in smaller US public schools. This article is ranked as C-Class for its quality. It is part of WikiProject for Linguistics. One relevant discussion that this article somewhat addressed that we talked about in class was 'Critical Period'. The article brings up research supporting that adults have better ability of learning foreign language than children because of a better understanding of how grammar works. This does differ to critical period, as Critical Period is more related to a children learning their mother tongue, not foreign language. The article does a good explanation of this distinction of foreign language to mother tongue language.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions

• 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?

Overall evaluation

I believe this article is well done for the most part. It explained the topic of foreign language and made important distinctions of its definition. It also brought upon some interesting research related to the topic and mostly did so in a concise way. One thing the article can improve is use more updated research and updated articles and many resources seemed pretty old. Overall, the article is developed but could add some more through updated research and potentially more content.

Optional activity

• 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: