User:NRC2020UPRC/Evaluate an Article

Evaluating "Zumbo's Just Desserts" article.

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

• Name of article: "Zumbo's Just Desserts"
• Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
  • I chose this particular article because I had already seen this program before and I really enjoyed it. I thought it would be interesting to read and evaluate it for this assignment.

Lead

Guiding questions

• Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
• Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
• Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
• Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation

This article has an introductory sentence that describes the article's topic. The information about the program is not completely there. Despite that, "Zumbo's Just Desserts" article is very clear to understand. Unfortunately, it doesn't have a completely detailed structure in the content. It has a very clear introductory sentence; it has a neutral point of view, but this article is just a part of another two articles called "Zumbo's Just Desserts (season 1)" and "Zumbo's Just Desserts (season 2)".

Content

Guiding questions

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
• Is the content up-to-date?
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Content evaluation

Even though this article is not completely detailed about the program (covering the two seasons of the program in general), the content is up to date. Clearly, as I have mentioned, there is some missing content that's distribute in the other two articles. Something that's not necessary because "Zumbo's Just Desserts" program covers the two seasons as only one program (which in the future may change). The last time the article was edited was on September 16, 2020 (very recent).

Tone and Balance

Guiding questions

• Is the article neutral?
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation

Meanwhile, this article is neutral with the information it presents. It has a neutral language and it has facts provided by different sources. The article doesn't attempt to persuade the reader, that's why it has a neutral point of view. The information in this article it's real based on the references it provides and the other two articles that are related.

Sources and References

Guiding questions

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
• Are the sources current?
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
• Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation

Also, the sources of this article are from different kind of blogs and internet newspapers. Even though blogs are not considered as a reliable source, for this particular article, blogs are one of the resources to find information about a program not detailed in a book. This article has a total of 52 references which are more from the "TV tonight Australian's blog". However, they are more reliable sources that provides more completeness for this article (such as actually seeing the Australian's program to be clear about the information found in a blog). But in this case the article has a clear information from a source not consider a reliable source. This source needs to be reliable so the information published is trusted and it develops good results by working really hard on it (so other people can use it as another source).

Organization

Guiding questions

• Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation

The organization is not completely developed because they are some points not mentioned there. It provides a short structure with relevant but not so detailed information about the program.

Images and Media

Guiding questions

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
• Are images well-captioned?
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation

It has two charts to organize all the participants of this Australian's program making it clear to understand and give an idea of what the program is about.

Checking the talk page

Guiding questions

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation

In the talk page of this article they are some comments about a spoiler of the winner of the program the article had (apparently) before it was edited. Even though in the beginning of the article it doesn't tell who the winner is going to be, it tells who the winners were in the charts below in the article (for the two seasons).

Overall impressions

Guiding questions

• What is the article's overall status?
• What are the article's strengths?
• How can the article be improved?
• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation

Finally, this article can be improved to make it a more detailed and completed article. Just making only one article of the Australian's program in general. There is no need to make different articles and mention them as "main articles" in the "series details". Because its only one program with two series (until now). All the information also provided in the other two articles complements what should be the mayor article. Just to make it a good article for others to learn more about it.

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: