 | 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. |
(Provide a link to the article here.) Drug education
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)
I chose this article because there is a particular disorder relating to drug addiction. It matters because there are certain humans that seem to have no control over the craving for a drug and it's interesting to me that it could be neurological.
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)
The article seems to be very well put together. I think drug education is an important thing, although I do have my opinions about it. It comes across as very neutral and fact based which makes it easy to read. As it discusses the DARE program, it doesn't only talk about the program and an excellent source of information for young students, it also mentions that there is no scientific proof to show the DARE program is even effective. The only part that I do feel was slightly out of place and unnecessary is the section regarding high school students and steroids. I think a better supporting example could have been chosen.
| 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. |
(Provide a link to the article here.) Drug education
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)
I chose this article because there is a particular disorder relating to drug addiction. It matters because there are certain humans that seem to have no control over the craving for a drug and it's interesting to me that it could be neurological.
(Compose a detailed evaluation of the article here, considering each of the key aspects listed above. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what a useful Wikipedia article evaluation looks like.)
The article seems to be very well put together. I think drug education is an important thing, although I do have my opinions about it. It comes across as very neutral and fact based which makes it easy to read. As it discusses the DARE program, it doesn't only talk about the program and an excellent source of information for young students, it also mentions that there is no scientific proof to show the DARE program is even effective. The only part that I do feel was slightly out of place and unnecessary is the section regarding high school students and steroids. I think a better supporting example could have been chosen.