User:BaileyNem/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: Arts Administration
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- This article is a broad article about everyday operations that artists face.

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.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- Not as of recent.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- Its relatively concise.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes.
Is the content up-to-date?
- Most of the references are somewhat recent, but there are a few that are out of date.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Not that I see. Most has been edited out according to the Talk page.

Is the article neutral?
- Yes.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Not overall, however there are certain phrases used that suggest bias.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Not that I see.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- Other that some phrases that suggest bias no. Most information is factual and backed up using wiki links.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- As of recent yes. According to the talk page there use to be links that were broken and sources to scam sites.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Yes, they are thorough. Most sources are wiki linked and the sources that are actually linked direct you to the main site where you can access more information.
Are the sources current?
- Most sources are current, however some references are a little outdated.
Check a few links. Do they work?
- Yes.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Yes.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Not that I am aware of.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- Yes.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- No, there are no images on this article at all.
Are images well-captioned?
- There are no images.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- There are no images.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- There are no images.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- The few comments on the talk page about this article were mostly saying there were broken links and bad citations.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- It has been rated Start-class and low importance on wikiprojects.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- This article is less about art administrations but a list of colleges that teach about the topic.

What is the article's overall status?
- I would say it is in bad shape, though it has underwent some fixes the actual article is weak in content.
What are the article's strengths?
- The corrected sources and links as well as the structure of the article. Content is lacking.
How can the article be improved?
- A more in depth background on the topic instead of the lists of colleges that provide information about the topic.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- Poorly developed. I feel this article has the right structure and ideas, but it is executed poorly with not much direction.

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 — ~~~~