User:Lenunn/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.

*My writing is italicized*

• Name of article: - Disenfranchised Grief - Disenfranchised grief#cite note-1
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. - This article was listed with available articles for our class and has a starter rating. After reading the article I noticed several ways that it could be improved, so it seemed like a good choice for this assignment.

Lead

Guiding questions:

• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? - It does contain an introductory sentence, but after doing some brief research into the topic I think the definition could be improved.
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? It touches on some of the content, but does not preview the sections in a clear way.
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? It does note some topics that are not visited later in the article.
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is somewhat scattered and unfocused in its content. It is not overly detailed because not all content is fully relevant.

Content

Guiding questions:

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Almost all of the content is relevant, especially in body of the article.
• Is the content up-to-date? The majority of the sources of the content is quite outdated. A lot of recent research could be applied to this article.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Some of the content are bad examples of disenfranchised grief in my opinion, and could be replaced with more widely acknowledged examples.

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

• Is the article neutral? Yes, nothing seems to be stated with a certain agenda in mind.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Nothing comes across this way.
• Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or underrepresented? There is not much about what people might be doing to counteract disenfranchised grief, only the negative aspects of it.
• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No it does not.

Sources and References

Guiding questions:

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? I think some statements should be cited and are not, but most facts are based on sources.
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? They reflect literature from when the article was originally being written, but not current literature.
• Are the sources current?- I think that the sources could be updated and refreshed with newer scholarly research, based on a quick search.
• Check a few links. Do they work? Most of the links work, but not all sources are cited and linked, making it difficult to find.

Organization

Guiding questions:

• Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Some parts, especially in the lead are scattered and could be more concise if revised.
• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No spelling or grammar errors.
• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It is split up into distinct sections, but I think more sections could be added to make the article more complete.

Images and Media

Guiding questions:

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? No images are on the page, which could be because of the ambiguity of the subject.
• Are images well-captioned? NA
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? NA
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? NA

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions:

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Some efforts are stated about making the article less than just a definition of the subject, but not a lot has been discussed on the talk page.
• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is a starter class article, and is a part of the psychology wiki project.
• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? NA

Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

• What is the article's overall status? It has been rated as a start class article. Overall, the article contributes to available information on the topic and provides a basic definition of the topic.
• What are the article's strengths? The article covers an important topic, and has a well defined structure and additional content sections after the lead.
• How can the article be improved? Adding in new research to the content sections and revising the lead will make the article much better.
• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? It is slightly underdeveloped and could use additional sources from recent research.

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: