Jump to content

User:Looganealabbas/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.

  • Yoruba religion: Yoruba religion
  • Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen this article because learning about different cultures and religions is interesting to me.

Lead

[edit]
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? No, but it includes a table of contents
  • Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes, it includes some religions that the article does not talk about
  • Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It has enough information that would tell the reader what to expect

Lead evaluation

[edit]

Content

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes it is
  • Is the content up-to-date? Yes, there are many people who made edits in 2015 and some people are still adding and editing information. The last edit was in April 2019.
  • Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, I think the content covered is about the Yoruba religion and everything is included

Content evaluation

[edit]

Tone and Balance

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • Is the article neutral? Yes the article is neutral
  • Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No there are no biased claims
  • Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I think that all view points are represented equally
  • Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No there is no persuasion in the article

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 it is
  • Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? I believe so, there are about 20 references
  • Are the sources current? I would say they could be more current, the newest source is from 2016
  • Check a few links. Do they work? Some of them work, but most of them redirect me to websites that need me to sign in. A few were not available.

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 the article is well written and easy to read
  • Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? I have not seen any spelling errors, but there may be some grammatical ones that I did not see as an error
  • Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes, I would say that the article is well organized and it was easy to look for information in it

Organization evaluation

[edit]

Images and Media

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes the article includes a few images, they help with understanding the topic but it could use more images
  • Are images well-captioned? Yes they are well captioned, but they could also use more description
  • Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Yes all of them are released under the Creative Commons organization, with proper licensing
  • Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Not really, they are all on the side as a column. It would help better if they were within the text

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? There is a Clean up tag where two people arguing about the lead of the article. There is also many people who are saying that the article need some more attention and editing
  • How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It has been listed as a level 4 vital article in Philosophy. It is also part of five WikiProjects (Africa/Benin, Nigeria, Yoruba, Religion, and Mythology)
  • How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? Overall it is the same, but they talked about how some religions are connected in someways, and they discuss information that is connected to Yoruba, not just Yoruba

Talk page evaluation

[edit]

Overall impressions

[edit]
Guiding questions
  • What is the article's overall status? Overall the article has good information that it could be a start point for someone who would want to learn about Yoruba's religion
  • What are the article's strengths? it is well organized and detailed. It has many sources that are credible and it has covered the topic very well
  • How can the article be improved? more images could be added to it. Some more editing would help the article, and some more information would be helpful
  • How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? it is well developed

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: