Jump to content

User:Raymond Heredia/Evaluate an Article

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Marriage[edit]

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

  • Marriage. Marriage
  • I chose this article to evaluate because I recently got married and I believe marriage is a beautiful thing.

Lead[edit]

Guiding questions
The Lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly describes the articles topic, and the true meaning of the term marriage.
  • 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 articles content is related to the topic, as the content was last edited a week ago making the articles content up-to-date. The article also has in-depth information in the form of categories to click on for more information. I don’t believe the article is missing anything.

  • 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]

The content is relevant and very informative, my favorite part of the article is that it outlines the scope and goals of the topic.

Tone and Balance[edit]

Guiding questions

This article is neutral, I do not feel it is biased or overrepresented. However I do feel the article persuades the reader in favor of the topic and the benefits of marriage.

  • 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

All of the facts in the article are backed by a credible source of information, very in-depth as it has many terms and the definition of those terms. All of the sources are current and currently working, due to the article being last edited a week ago.

  • 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

I found this article very easy on the eyes, and clear to read. I did find a few spelling errors while reading the article. I feel that all of the major topics were properly put in place for the reader to follow along and understand the topic. Providing different prospectives, and religious prospectives as well. Once again, I do believe this article is persuading the reader to see the benefits of marriage.

  • 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

This article does include various pictures both past and present, showing different cultures and their perspective of the topic. There are also maps of different countries, showing the various laws and restrictions in those countries compared to others.

  • 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

Many readers are finding spelling errors and grammatical errors. It also looks like it was mentioned in a radio station in Vermont in 2013. Readers gave this article a C-class rating

  • 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 l I enjoyed reading this article.

  • 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 — ~~~~