This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: ( Saccopharyngiforms)
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because it is of a particular species of aquatic animal that I like and have a high amount of interest in.
- Guiding questions
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It does.
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? This is a short article so no it does not nor does it need to.
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Everything in the article is presented briefly in the lead.
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise and gives the basic information of the species.
- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Everything is relevant and on topic.
- Is the content up-to-date? Latest reference was from 2018.
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? From what I can tell everything is relevant
- Guiding questions
- Is the article neutral? Yes
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are not
- 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: Article remains neutral and does not try to do anything other than inform.
- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all are scholarly sources
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they go into heavy detail on the taxonomy of the eel species and other info about them.
- Are the sources current? Most are.
- Check a few links. Do they work? The links that have a hyperlink work.
Sources and references evaluation: Though it only has 4 links they are all relevant and heavily detailed and are from a scholarly source.
- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I could tell.
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes
Organization evaluation: Article is neat and organized with no spelling or grammatical errors (that I could tell).
- 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? Yes
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes
Images and media evaluation: Article only has one image of a "Pelican Eel" but it adheres to the regulations of Wikipedia so it's good.
- Guiding questions
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? That the article needs more information.
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as a "Start Mid" article and is group into the "Wikiproject Fish" group.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It doesn't really differ.
Talk page evaluation: Very little activity but the topic has very little information so this is to be expected.
- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status? Start Mid
- What are the article's strengths? Very short and to the point.
- How can the article be improved? More information should be gathered if it can be found.
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I'd say it feels a bit lacking but considering the topic it's hard to find scholarly sources to bolster the article.
Overall evaluation: Good if you want very basic knowledge on Gulper Eels but if you want to find out more information you'll have to look around other places.
- 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.
- Name of article: ( Saccopharyngiforms)
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article because it is of a particular species of aquatic animal that I like and have a high amount of interest in.
- Guiding questions
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? It does.
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? This is a short article so no it does not nor does it need to.
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Everything in the article is presented briefly in the lead.
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is concise and gives the basic information of the species.
- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Everything is relevant and on topic.
- Is the content up-to-date? Latest reference was from 2018.
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? From what I can tell everything is relevant
- Guiding questions
- Is the article neutral? Yes
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? There are not
- 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: Article remains neutral and does not try to do anything other than inform.
- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, all are scholarly sources
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes they go into heavy detail on the taxonomy of the eel species and other info about them.
- Are the sources current? Most are.
- Check a few links. Do they work? The links that have a hyperlink work.
Sources and references evaluation: Though it only has 4 links they are all relevant and heavily detailed and are from a scholarly source.
- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Not that I could tell.
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes
Organization evaluation: Article is neat and organized with no spelling or grammatical errors (that I could tell).
- 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? Yes
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes
Images and media evaluation: Article only has one image of a "Pelican Eel" but it adheres to the regulations of Wikipedia so it's good.
- Guiding questions
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? That the article needs more information.
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated as a "Start Mid" article and is group into the "Wikiproject Fish" group.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? It doesn't really differ.
Talk page evaluation: Very little activity but the topic has very little information so this is to be expected.
- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status? Start Mid
- What are the article's strengths? Very short and to the point.
- How can the article be improved? More information should be gathered if it can be found.
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I'd say it feels a bit lacking but considering the topic it's hard to find scholarly sources to bolster the article.
Overall evaluation: Good if you want very basic knowledge on Gulper Eels but if you want to find out more information you'll have to look around other places.
- 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: