User:Jlsenn/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?
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I am knowledgeable about this field and wanted to see how clear and factual this information is.
Evaluate the article
Lead Section
- Provides definition but could go into more detail about what all is considered to be "equestrian" such as the various disciplines
- Too short; not enough information
Content
- Gives bullet points of examples
- More detail would be beneficial
- Good variety but no real weight to the information
- Little to no information about this topic
Tone and Balance
- No tone as the wiki page is too short and too little information
Sources and References
- No sources section, but links provides throughout the page.
- Essential seems to be a page to link you to other pages with actual information
- If this wiki page should stay on Wiki, I believe it should be able to stand alone and have actual content, rather than only string into other Wiki pages
Organization and Writing Quality
- Very straight forward and organized as expected
- Good use of bullet points, but sub-categories could also be useful
- No outline
- Only 3 categories
Images and Media
- No images or media directly on this page
- Could be beneficial to help one understand the idea
Talk Page Discussion
- Only links have been added
- No actual talking points
- Is within the WikiProject Disambiguation
Overall Impressions
- Needs a LOT of work if it is to stand alone as a wiki page
- When researching on Wiki, it seems that other equestrian pages are more beneficial and provide much more detail-if so, why have another page talking about the same thing?
- Overall, article needs work if it is to remain as a stand-alone
- Last edited in 2010
- Article is not near completion; poorly developed and needs to be redone for better education of the sport
jlsenn~~~~