User:Laurengordon4/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:

Lead section

A 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.

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? (It shouldn't.)
Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Content

A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.

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?
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?

Tone and Balance

Wikipedia 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.

Is the article neutral?
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Sources and References

A 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.

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?
Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization and writing quality

The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.

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?

Images and Media

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?

Talk page discussion

The 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.

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?

Overall impressions

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?

Examples of good feedback

A 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.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?

Dexter (TV series)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I am choosing this article because I really enjoyed this TV series. Especially with a new season coming out after years, I feel that it is important to look at this page to see ig there can be any vital information added to it.

Evaluate the article

Lead Article: the lead starts off very well. They talk about how he works as a blood stain pattern analysis, this should be changed to blood platter analyst. There could possibly be more information added into the lead so give a quick overview on the show.

Plot: there are two things that I think should be added into the plot section. It should tell that he not only works with blood but he is almost obsessed with it. Along with this, they need to make sure to mention something about his relationship with his sister and the importance that she has in his life. As well as the relationship with his sister, they could talk about the flashbacks that happen of him and his dad throughout the show. Besides these two, the plot could use more information about wha goes on in the actual show. it gives a good backstory on Dexter but it doesn't talk much about what actually goes on in the show. One of these things being his family life with Rita and kids.

Crew: During this part, it is very lengthy with a lot of facts just piled in there. I think that the information in there is good but I could be organized better, possibly by relevance to him. I would put his family in one part. Then another paragraph as his main coworkers and a third paragraph for his victims and other people not very important in the main part of the show. All of the links to the characters are working but not all of them have quick pictures to look at, this would be something to edit.

Overall, I think this page isn't horrible. There are some tweaks that are NEEDED but it has a lot of the important parts and goes into depth on things like production. One thing I do appreciate that has already been done is adding in the information of the new season that is coming out in November. I believe that all of the information in here is relevant to the show but could be moves around a little bit. Also, not that there could really be any, there is no bias shown in the article. All of the cources that I clicked on worked and looked reliable. The talk page didn't seem to have anything going on with it.