User:Haleyps901/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]
Alma Levant Hayden - Wikipedia
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?[edit]
I chose this article because it is about an African American female scientist and her accomplishments which intrigues me because her story aligns with my future goals. Her story matters because she was the first black woman to become a scientist at a science agency in Washington D.C., along with a plethora of other achievements and firsts, which at the time was very hard to achieve and rare for a woman, especially black. My first impression of this article that it was very straight forward, no extra fluff, darting right into her accomplishments and what she is known for, which to me is not the most pleasant way to start an article, but it gets right to the point which leaves no room for dragging the information out, which is good.
Evaluate the article[edit]
(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 was very straightforward, giving direct information, no storytelling, just information. One thing that distracted me was the use of the word "may" throughout the article which was used to allege some information on the topic in question. These allegations, however, were followed by sources to back up the information. Any information that could have used more detail was followed up with sources for clarification, however I would have liked more information to make the article flow better. The article feels like bullet points strung into sentences and the sentence structure is off. I liked how the article brought up the controversial aspects of the topic's life and career, while also tying into her story. Overall, this article gave what it needed to which was information on Alma Levant Hayden, a black chemist.
Haley Pearce-Savoy~~~~