User:Bellwell567/Evaluate an Article
 | 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. |
Which article are you evaluating?
[edit]Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit]I chose to evaluate this article because I like the environment of the arctic.
Evaluate the article
[edit]Lead Section
[edit]The lead section gives a concise definition of what the Arctic is-- the characteristics of the ecosystem, what regions it includes, and a brief list of the wildlife it includes.
Content
[edit]Each section of the article has an appropriate amount of information for the topic. All of the content is relevant and the most important concepts are present. The article also discusses underrepresented populations like the indigenous communities residing in the arctic, and discusses issues of climate change that are relevant to the arctic.
Tone and Balance
[edit]The article remains neutral and factual while still discussing political issues regarding arctic regions. All content is fact based.
Sources and References
[edit]All information is properly cited from the source. References are relevant and include recent information when necessary. All links are functioning and active.
Organization and Writing Quality
[edit]The writing is clear and the organization makes sense. Proper grammar is used and it is well written.
Images and Media
[edit]Images are relevant and depict the content being discussed.
Talk Page Discussion
[edit]This article's talk page has not been very active within the last five years. Most of the conversation is about adding additional information and adding more sources or citations. The most recent activity downgraded the article to C-Class.
Overall Impressions
[edit]I think the article gives good general information about the arctic. The article is rated C-Class, mostly because some sources need to be added and the "further reading" section includes some irrelevant articles.