User:Politicaladventure/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?

(1998–99 NBA lockout)

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

(The reasoning behind me choosing this article was my interest in the sport of basketball. When clicking on the article, it popped right up with a view of the NBA lockout that was quite an important time in the sport of basketball. During this era, it changed the whole sport to what it has become today.

Evaluate the article

Lead:

• Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, It does a good job getting right into what the topic is about which is the NBA Lockout.
• Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? Somewhat, it kinds of shares what the article will go through however without really bring much of it up.
• Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.) No, everything discussed in the lead is discussed through the article.
• Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed? From what I see, the article is concise and gets directly to the point that it wants to make.

Content:

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Yes, the content of the article is relevant to the topic as it shows pictures of parties that were involved at the time.
• Is the content up-to-date? Yes, the content is up to date as their were edits made less than a week ago.
• Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, all of the information is necessary in understand the position the lockout out NBA players in.
• Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? No

Tone:

• Is the article neutral? Yes, the article is neutral and doesn't apply any false claims.
• Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No, it is factual information
• Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? No, it is factual viewpoints
• Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such? Yes, it shares how the nba players and other felt during the lockout
• Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No, it provides a factual view.

Source:

• Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? Yes, looking through, all sources are good factual sources
• Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? Yes, all sources provide great information on the topic.
• Are the sources current? Not all sources are current dated as the lockout did happen many years back.
• Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? Yes, they are written by many viewpoints however within the same say.
• 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.) I believe the author at time used good sources to cover the story however their are many pieces of information you can find new today than before.
• Check a few links. Do they work? Yes, they do work!

Organization:

• Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes, the article is concise and clear. It provides a lot of great information regarding the NBA lockout and provides a lot of factual information during that era.
• Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Checking through spelling and grammatical errors, none of those are really portrayed through the story from what I see, the author did a great job going through to fix the mistakes.
• Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? The article is well organized discussing each topic important at time into different sections so the reader wouldn't be confused.

Images:

• Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, it provides images of the people who were involved mostly through the NBA lockout period and what they had done at the time.
• Are images well-captioned? Yes, they describe what the person had done at the time of the election and how they are important.
• Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? They do!
• Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Yes, they go along the page.

Talk Page:

• What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? In the talk page, the most topic that is discussed is the GA Review which seems important. They were trying to do peer review in order to ensure there aren't any mistakes in the article.
• How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is a good article according to the Wiki page.
• How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? I believe the main difference is the factual information that can be provided from all reliable sources, I believe that is something we really haven't done through class yet.

Overall:

• What is the article's overall status? Good article
• What are the article's strengths? I believe the article has factual and quite some knowledgable information for someone researching about the NBA lockout.
• How can the article be improved? Some more images would help the reader be able to be connect more with the article itself.
• How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say the article is quite well developed and doesn't really have any mistakes through it.