User:Meticulousonion/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: HICDEP
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate.
- It is an article related to international HIV research within the last 20 years.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding question
- Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Yes
- Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- No (there are no sections)
- Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
- No
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
- Concise
Lead evaluation
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Yes, the content explains the subject and provides information on its origin and development
- Is the content up-to-date?
- No, but not much has been changed other than periodic revisions to the protocol.
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- The article is very brief to begin with so there isn't anything extraneous.
Content evaluation
[edit]Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article neutral?
- Yes, it is a description of the protocol and remains factual throughout the entire article.
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- No
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- No. Could be interesting to include more information about how the exchange is being used and if those using it have benefited.
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
- No
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- There is a decent balance of journal articles and information from the protocol's website.
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Most information on the topic comes from the organization, so yes.
- Are the sources current?
- No. Many links in the article were out of date or have since been directed to pages that do not contain the original material.
- Check a few links. Do they work?
- Some but not all. (I did update a few)
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- It is very concise, but I am not sure if that was due to the writing or if there just isn't much information available.
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- No
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
- No, but if it was broken into sections each would only be around two sentences.
Organization evaluation
[edit]Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- No images were used
- Are images well-captioned?
- See above
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- See above
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
- See above
Images and media evaluation
[edit]Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- There was one message left by an archive bot and then the notes I left when I did some edits to the page.
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- It was added from the project "Articles for creation." It is rated as start-class.
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
- We have not discussed this topic specifically, however information sharing has been discussed.
Talk page evaluation
[edit]Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- What is the article's overall status?
- It's hardly more than a stub. If there is a significant need for this information, it could use a serious update. Otherwise, any other article that references this may as well just link directly to the HICDEP website.
- What are the article's strengths?
- It provides a concise description of the protocol and its development history.
- How can the article be improved?
- Up-to-date information on how the protocol is being used would greatly improve the usefulness of the article.
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
- Underdeveloped
Overall evaluation
[edit]Optional activity
[edit]- 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:
- Talk:HIV Cohorts Data Exchange Protocol
- Also made edits on the article