Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
Lead
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
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
no
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
a bit overly detailed
Lead evaluation: 7/10
Content
Guiding questions
Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
yes
Is the content up-to-date?
yes
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
no
Content evaluation: 9/10
Tone and Balance
Guiding questions
Is the article neutral?
yes
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
no
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
no
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
no
Tone and balance evaluation: 10/10
Sources and References
Guiding questions
Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
yes
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
yes
Are the sources current?
yes
Check a few links. Do they work?
yes
Sources and references evaluation: 10/10
Organization
Guiding questions
Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
a little too scholarly, difficult for non-Academics to read
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?
Yes
Organization evaluation: 8/10
Images and Media
Guiding questions
Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
no
Are images well-captioned?
n/a
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
n/a
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
n/a
Images and media evaluation: 1/10
Checking the talk page
Guiding questions
What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
none
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
it is rated as a 'start' article with low importance, part of the psychology WikiProject.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
n/a
Talk page evaluation: 10/10
Overall impressions
Guiding questions
What is the article's overall status?
incomplete, but a credible start
What are the article's strengths?
scholarly, well-cited, thoughtful
How can the article be improved?
more easy-to-read language, more depth
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
the subject matter it discusses is well-developed, but it needs more information on the topic as a whole
Overall evaluation: 7.86/10
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
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
Lead
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
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
no
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
a bit overly detailed
Lead evaluation: 7/10
Content
Guiding questions
Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
yes
Is the content up-to-date?
yes
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
no
Content evaluation: 9/10
Tone and Balance
Guiding questions
Is the article neutral?
yes
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
no
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
no
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
no
Tone and balance evaluation: 10/10
Sources and References
Guiding questions
Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
yes
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
yes
Are the sources current?
yes
Check a few links. Do they work?
yes
Sources and references evaluation: 10/10
Organization
Guiding questions
Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
a little too scholarly, difficult for non-Academics to read
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?
Yes
Organization evaluation: 8/10
Images and Media
Guiding questions
Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
no
Are images well-captioned?
n/a
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
n/a
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
n/a
Images and media evaluation: 1/10
Checking the talk page
Guiding questions
What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
none
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
it is rated as a 'start' article with low importance, part of the psychology WikiProject.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
n/a
Talk page evaluation: 10/10
Overall impressions
Guiding questions
What is the article's overall status?
incomplete, but a credible start
What are the article's strengths?
scholarly, well-cited, thoughtful
How can the article be improved?
more easy-to-read language, more depth
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
the subject matter it discusses is well-developed, but it needs more information on the topic as a whole
Overall evaluation: 7.86/10
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