User:Martinmadison/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: Rail transport in Hong Kong
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- Hong Kong has one of the most advanced transportation system. Its major backbone, MTR is one of the few metro transit system that makes profits.
- The articles provide a decent structure and yet more details can be added to provide a whole picture of MTR.
Lead[edit]
- Guiding questions
- Financial strategy of MTR and how it makes profit
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes, it clearly introduced the Railway transit system in Hong Kong including MTR and other oeprating systems.
- 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?
- Everything in Lead has been explained below. More details could be added to subsections.
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- 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, it included some of the latest events and impacts on the subject.
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Some details are missing on MTR profit strategy part.
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
- It doesn't have this issue.
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, all sources are backed either by academic articles or government public information. MTR provides neutral information and data mostly in investor relations section.
- 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, the history section provide great details based on academic research and entity public information
- 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?
- Yes
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Not seen any
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes, however, the order of some section could be changed for a smooth reading experience.
Organization evaluation[edit]
Images and Media[edit]
- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Yes, including pictures and MTR map
- 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. But it can be arranged in a more compact way. Current layout is a bit spreaded out.
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?
- Little conversations. Some suggesting adding the details of bridge, tunnl. Some suggesting adding the details about the implementation of AI in Transit system
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- Star class, high and it's part of the WikiProjects.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- Including multiple perspectives such as history, progress and other details.
Talk page evaluation[edit]
Overall impressions[edit]
- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status?
- Decent structure, some details can be added for future improvement.
- What are the article's strengths?
- Still, more details required
- How can the article be improved?
- more details to solidate the articles
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- Underdeveloped
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: