User:16mslack/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: Talk:Algae
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. Algae has many impacts on humans and I was curious to see what the general consensus on Algae was.

Lead

Guiding questions

• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
  • Yes.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
  • Yes, there are quick links to the various main topics discussed within the article.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
  • Discussions of other sources takes place with links to those sources. So information is indirectly given.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
  • The first little paragraph is concise, but seems to run on just a little long. I would probably add a little of what is stated to the other sections.

Content

Guiding questions

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
  • All of the content is relevant to the topic, yes.
• Is the content up-to-date?
  • Much of this article's contents are edited within the last 5 years at least so I would say that it is up-to-date.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
  • The article seems very well rounded and all information is relevant to the topic.

Content evaluation

Not as much content as I was expecting. Many links to other Algae articles, however, so maybe you would need to be more specific when using Wikipedia as your source of info.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

• Is the article neutral?
  • The Article does seem balanced to me. There is not just one user dominating the article.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
  • No, all of the different sections seem to be very neutral if biased at all.
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
  • the physiology and relationship to land plant sections seem to be very short. While sections such as the classification seem to be very complex.
• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
  • Not that I noticed.

Sources and References

Guiding questions

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
  • There are a plethora of cited sources to many universities and scholarly articles so I would say yes.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
  • Yes, there is a direct link to all other articles referenced.
• Are the sources current?
  • Most sources are within the last 10 years and studies of marine biology is rather new to the equation so yes.
• Check a few links. Do they work?
  • All links that I clicked on worked.

Organization

Guiding questions

• Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
  • Very concise, easy to read. I enjoyed it.
• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
  • Properly spell checked. The talk page not so much, but the actual page is well written.
• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
  • All topics are discussed only in their designated sections.

Images and Media

Guiding questions

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
  • When available yes. Good pictures too, not fuzzy or confusing to look at.
• Are images well-captioned?
  • Yes.
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
  • Yes.
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
  • Very easy to see why they are relevant to the sections.

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
  • People curious about some of the sources concerning books that are used as references. Otherwise not much.
• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
  • I do not see a rating, but it is part of a wikiproject.
• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
  • We haven't really discussed Algae in class yet, but it seems to be a brief overview of the algae, rather than how we go into more detail with various bacteria.

Overall impressions

Guiding questions

• What is the article's overall status?
  • The article is good.
• What are the article's strengths?
  • I would say that the strength is very obviously the characterizing of Algae.
• How can the article be improved?
  • I would add more to even out the sections rather than have some very long and some very short sections.
• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
  • There have been many revisions and past versions to this article so I would say that it is very well developed.

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: