User:Moenouman./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.

• Mountain : (Mountain)
• I chose this article because Mountains are a geological feature, which relates to Geology 209

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

The Lead for this article does includes a introductory sentence that is easy to understand and describes the article topic. The Lead also has a table which includes the major sections of the article which makes it easier for the reader of the article to understand what the article will be discussing and where they could get the information they need. The Lead also has information that is not talked about in the article, there are links provided so the reader can access this information with just a click. I believe the lead may be a little overly detailed after the first bit since it starts talking more in depth about certain topics which I believe could be discussed in other sections

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

I believe the content provided is very relevant to the article, the content seems to cover almost everything there is to know about mountains, may that be the climate, height, types of mountains and so on and so forth. From what I understand the content of this article is up to date and I don't see any need for updating the content. The article does indeed address topics that may not be represented as much, the article does this by talking about the mountain societies around the world and talks about certain areas of the world that may not be represented as much.

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

The article is very neutral toned, I did not seem to catch any bias at all when I was reading the article. I believe this is mainly due to the fact the article is more so providing information and mostly scientific, and scientific information cannot be biased since it is proven.

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 consists of over 44 references used, which goes to show the authors of the article used information from all around to write the article, which makes the article very strong and reliable. the article also contains 50 links which shows how the article provides a lot of information outside of the article, the link provided seem to work as I clicked on a few of them. The article was last edited September 20, 2020 which goes to show the article has be updated very recently.

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

For the most part the article is well written and easy to understand. if someone who had no idea about what mountains are, was given the article, they'd have a easy time reading the article and won’t get confused. I didn't seem to catch any grammatical errors in the article. The article is broken down into the major sections, and these sections are written in an order, so they build upon each other which makes the article easy to understand.

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

The article has 2 images that enhance the topic. Some of the other images in the article are not helpful at all and are just there because they happen to be picture of mountains. The images are well captioned as they help the reader understand what the image is of, since they are just pictures of mountains it would be hard for people to distinguish the mountains, so the captions do a good job with explaining what the images are of. the images are all posted on one side of the article rather than being all over the place, so I believe the images are laid out in a visually appealing way.

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

As the article is very scientific informing, conversations among well informed individuals were probably taken place. Wikipedia goes a lot more in depth and details then we have in class. Wikipedia also talks about the actual definition of a mountain, so just overall Wikipedia has the little details and covers all the information about mountains, soothing we haven't done in class.

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 think the article is very strong and don't see areas that could use more information. It’s a well-developed article and seems to check off all the boxes when it comes to article expectations. I think one area that could use improvements in the article would the Lead of the article, some people may find the article Lead a little excessive.

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: