 | Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.
Sources and ReferencesA Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved. |
Which article are you evaluating?
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it relates to my course and is general enough to have a substantial amount of information and a talk page.
Evaluate the article
The article has an effective lead section, which provides an easy-to-understand identification of what the term "mindfulness" means. It summarizes the different sections of the article, including the history of mindfulness, its usage in psychology, and criticisms. The page contains a wealth of information, with content mostly focusing on the history of mindfulness and its applications in psychology. The article could use more information on the criticisms of mindfulness, particularly in regards to the Western approach. The article is well-developed and organized, with a neutral tone. Generally there is a good usage of citations, however there were some parts of the article that I found to be lacking in citations, particularly in the history subsection. There is a general lack of images throughout the article, which it could benefit from. The article is very well-developed and is particularly strong in exploring mindfulness as it relates to philosophy and psychology. My main critique is that the article is skewed toward the Western understanding of mindfulness, and could be more balanced as a whole.
| Evaluate an article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider: Lead sectionA good lead section defines the topic and provides a concise overview. A reader who just wants to identify the topic can read the first sentence. A reader who wants a very brief overview of the most important things about it can read the first paragraph. A reader who wants a quick overview can read the whole lead section.
ContentA good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
Tone and BalanceWikipedia articles should be written from a neutral point of view; if there are substantial differences of interpretation or controversies among published, reliable sources, those views should be described as fairly as possible.
Sources and ReferencesA Wikipedia article should be based on the best sources available for the topic at hand. When possible, this means academic and peer-reviewed publications or scholarly books.
Organization and writing qualityThe writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
Images and Media
Talk page discussionThe article's talk page — and any discussions among other Wikipedia editors that have been taking place there — can be a useful window into the state of an article, and might help you focus on important aspects that you didn't think of.
Overall impressions
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved. |
Which article are you evaluating?
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because it relates to my course and is general enough to have a substantial amount of information and a talk page.
Evaluate the article
The article has an effective lead section, which provides an easy-to-understand identification of what the term "mindfulness" means. It summarizes the different sections of the article, including the history of mindfulness, its usage in psychology, and criticisms. The page contains a wealth of information, with content mostly focusing on the history of mindfulness and its applications in psychology. The article could use more information on the criticisms of mindfulness, particularly in regards to the Western approach. The article is well-developed and organized, with a neutral tone. Generally there is a good usage of citations, however there were some parts of the article that I found to be lacking in citations, particularly in the history subsection. There is a general lack of images throughout the article, which it could benefit from. The article is very well-developed and is particularly strong in exploring mindfulness as it relates to philosophy and psychology. My main critique is that the article is skewed toward the Western understanding of mindfulness, and could be more balanced as a whole.