User:XFLQR/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: (link) Assistance dog
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I'm partnered with an assistance dog and interested in practices around the globe.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes. Could delete "in general" Unclear, US or global
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? In box of "contents"
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? Concise. might include additional sections
Lead evaluation OK
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes
- Is the content up-to-date? Could describe controversies
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Missing policy issues
Content evaluation Fair
[edit]Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article neutral? Yes, but avoids major issues.
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Overrepresented: Providers; Underrepresented: Consumers
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No
Tone and balance evaluation OK
[edit]Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Often not
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Too many websites
- Are the sources current? Yes
- Check a few links. Do they work? Most. Curlie does not.
Sources and references evaluation Needs Improvement
[edit]Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Some problems of word choice
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? No
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? No. Section on facility, therapy dogs is a tangent. Need sections on current issues, e.g. airlines
Organization evaluation Needs improvement
[edit]Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
- Are images well-captioned? Yes
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Probably
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Not really. Dogs in public, protest missing.
Images and media evaluation Fair
[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? Many on different laws, some on plagiarism
- How is the article rated? Did I miss this? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? Two projects
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? NA
Talk page evaluation Surprisingly good discussion, better than the entry
[edit]Overall impressions Needs Improvement
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status? Did I miss it? Is considered "high importance"
- What are the article's strengths? Describes service dog organizations
- How can the article be improved? Discussion of service dogs in schools, travel, employment
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? Underdeveloped
Overall evaluation Needs improvement
[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:User talk:Blastttt