This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Folklore Studies: ( Folklore studies)
- This article gives a brief overview of folklore studies.
- Guiding questions
The Lead does include a good introductory sentence, but does not overview the article's sections. It does not include information not present in the article and is very concise.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
The article's content is all relevant. Content seems up-to-date, and comprehensive.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
The article maintains an even, neutral tone, and threads the needle neatly between multiple viewpoints.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
Sources seem relatively comprehensive, although a few sections are sparse on citation. All links are functional. Most recent citations are from 2016.
- 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?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
- Guiding questions
Article is well written, with no blatant typos. I would have organized it differently, with the more abstract sections subsumed into the earlier paragraphs, but as an organizational theme it seems acceptable.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
Images are poorly captioned and sparse. Relevance limited. Functionality limited.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
Talk page reflects poorly on article. Popular opinion is that organization needs to be resorted for quick readability.
- 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?
- 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?
- 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:
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Folklore Studies: ( Folklore studies)
- This article gives a brief overview of folklore studies.
- Guiding questions
The Lead does include a good introductory sentence, but does not overview the article's sections. It does not include information not present in the article and is very concise.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
The article's content is all relevant. Content seems up-to-date, and comprehensive.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
The article maintains an even, neutral tone, and threads the needle neatly between multiple viewpoints.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
Sources seem relatively comprehensive, although a few sections are sparse on citation. All links are functional. Most recent citations are from 2016.
- 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?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
- Guiding questions
Article is well written, with no blatant typos. I would have organized it differently, with the more abstract sections subsumed into the earlier paragraphs, but as an organizational theme it seems acceptable.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
Images are poorly captioned and sparse. Relevance limited. Functionality limited.
- 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?
- Guiding questions
Talk page reflects poorly on article. Popular opinion is that organization needs to be resorted for quick readability.
- 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?
- 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?
- 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: