User:40.141.217.71/Evaluate an Article

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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: (Eliza Bisbee Duffey)
  • Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
    • It reflects the course I am enrolled in and is a stub article.

Lead[edit]

Guiding questions
  • Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
    • yes it states that Elizabeth is a Feminist and writer and how she contributes with her writings, which is what the article is about.
  • Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
    • yes it does.
  • Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
    • No just information in the article.
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
    • Concise and to the point.

Lead evaluation[edit]

Content[edit]

Guiding questions
  • Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
    • yes it has information on her early life as well as life accomplishments and her contributions.
  • Is the content up-to-date?
    • yes
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
    • There is no missing content.

Content evaluation[edit]

Tone and Balance[edit]

Guiding questions
  • Is the article neutral?
    • yes very neutral
  • Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
    • no claims
  • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
    • it is neutral
  • 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 listed at the bottom of article are reliable sources to the information
  • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
    • yes
  • Are the sources current?
    • no the sources are from many years ago
  • 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 easy to read very clear
  • Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
    • no
  • Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
    • yes it is broken down into early life and scholarly work.

Organization evaluation[edit]

Images and Media[edit]

Guiding questions
  • Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
    • no
  • Are images well-captioned?
    • n/a
  • Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
    • n/a
  • Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
    • n/a

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?
    • n/a no conversations
  • How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
    • Stud article
  • How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
    • n/a

Talk page evaluation[edit]

Overall impressions[edit]

Guiding questions
  • What is the article's overall status?
    • stud
  • What are the article's strengths?
    • clear and concise
  • How can the article be improved?
    • more information on her life other than early life and writing contributions
  • How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
    • neutral

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: