User:Mtoro10/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: Kiliwa Language
- I chose this article because it contains information I am looking into for further edits.
Lead[edit]
- Guiding questions
- The lead is brief and gets straight to the point to indicate what other names may be related to the topic. It also indicates the location of the area of people whom speak the language as well. Further on it contains a breakdown on what is to be expected throughout the rest of the article as well.
- 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[edit]
Content[edit]
- Guiding questions
- The content on this article is relevant containing brief information of the language itself for each of the sections that were put on the article. The article was last edited on May of 2019. There is plenty of information missing as well as further explanations to further understand under each of the sections.
- 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?
Content evaluation[edit]
Tone and Balance[edit]
- Guiding questions
- The tone of this article is neutral it is simply informing the reader about the language by giving background as well as further analysis.
- 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[edit]
Sources and References[edit]
- Guiding questions
- There is a good amount of sources and references listed for this article but most of them are not current. The only one that we can understand is current is one listed from 2018. Although showing they are old sources and references they do seem like reliable but it is difficult to view due to the accessibility.
- 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?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation[edit]
Organization[edit]
- Guiding questions
- The article over all is simple and brief. There isn't a lot of information on the page but it is organized in a clear and easy to read fashion. The article does not show any grammatical or spelling errors although some parts can use better clarification to further understand the information that was put forth.
- 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
- There are no images on the page itself but there are links to send you to different pages which contain images.
- 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[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
- Overall this article is very week. There is information on the topic itself and it is relevant but there is so much more to be added on the language as well that can make this page stronger. This can be done by adding more on the phonology, morphology, and syntax of the language as well as adding additional sources that are more recent.
- 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[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: