User:Yennilee/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: Jensen (gamer)
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.

I chose this article because I am interested in gaming, especially the online League of Legends community. Jensen is a promising pro player in North America and I would like to contribute to his Wikipedia page because I feel that there is a lot to add, especially since it has not been updated since 2018.

Lead

Guiding questions

• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?

Yes, the first sentence in the lead has accurate and concise information about Jensen and his career.

• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?

No, the lead includes some information that is not addressed in the table of contents or in other sections of the article. The article does not have much information in general, so the lead simply goes beyond what the article can tell its reader.

• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?

Yes, the lead includes a lot of information that is not found elsewhere in the article.

• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

The lead is overly detailed in a sense that there is specific information that is not so much what the person is known for. I feel that the lead could be altered so that it gives more of a well-rounded and accurate depiction of Jensen.

Content

Guiding questions

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic?

The article's content is relevant to the topic but there are many gaps in the information. For example, the teams that Jensen was on and what he won with those teams are not displayed.

• Is the content up-to-date?

The content is not up to date. The last information is from 2018 and the only comment on the talk page is also from 2018.

• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

I think the content noted in the lead about Jensen's banning does not belong because it is not what he is known for. Since there is a lot of content missing due to the article last being updated in 2018, as well as the lack of information in general, there is a lot of content that can be included in future edits.

• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

I do not think that the article is associated with any equity gaps. There also is not any relation to historically underrepresented populations or topics because the League of Legends community in general is not extremely big or talked about.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

• Is the article neutral?

Although the article is neutral, it does not have a balance of positive and negative information. It talks about Jensen getting banned in 2013 in a neutral way, but the overall article is not what he is known for or has contributed.

• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?

There are not claims that are biased or information that is misconstrued. The article really does not have enough information to be biased.

• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?

The information about Jensen in this article is relatively limited so there are not many viewpoints to evaluate.

• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

No, the article has no agenda other than presenting his past.

Sources and References

Guiding questions

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?

Yes, all of the facts are cited and based on the references, coming from reliable sources.

• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?

No, the sources are not thorough because there is a lot of information available about the teams he was on and his successes but the article does not really have that. The sources also overwhelmingly report on one topic mentioned in the article.

• Are the sources current?

The sources are not outdated because they reference a specific event, however, there are other sources with recent information that can also be included.

• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?

Yes, the articles are written by different people representing different journalism companies. In this context, they are historically marginalized people.

• Check a few links. Do they work?

Most of the links work. All but one.

Organization

Guiding questions

• Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?

Yes, the article is easy to follow and is relatively concise given that there is not much information in it.

• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?

No, there are no grammatical or spelling errors.

• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

The article is well-organized as it is now but there are only a few sections and the lead so there is not much to go off of in this current form.

Images and Media

Guiding questions

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?

No, there are no images in this article but there are a lot of parts in the article that could benefit from a picture.

• Are images well-captioned?

There are no pictures in this article.

• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?

There are no pictures in this article.

• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

There are no pictures in this article.

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?

Unfortunately, there are no conversations going on for this article. The last comment was more of a notice about the discussion being moved.

• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?

The article is rated as Stub-class and low-importance. It is in the Video games WIkiProject.

• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Overall impressions

Guiding questions

• What is the article's overall status?

The article needs a lot more information as well as improvement because there are a lot of highlights, general and personal information, and history in general that could make the article much more inclusive and representative of him. As it is now, the article is subpar and could use much more attention.

• What are the article's strengths?

The article does a great job of listing all of the tournaments he has participated in till 2018. It is also readable and concise so that there is no confusion. It's chronological nature helps with understanding, but besides that, there is not much information.

• How can the article be improved?

The article could improve in many ways. I would include more of Jensen's history and display it in a reader-friendly manner and also include images or sections to make the article generally more well-rounded.

• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Because of the lack of information and content, I would say the article is poorly developed. It is not close to being complete, and in general needs more additions.

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: