User:ICK3PITT/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article

This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.

Name of article: Urban archaeology
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose to evaluate this because it really interested me to find out more behind the discoveries in cities and how the ended up the way they have.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?: Yes, it gives a clear definition of Urban Archaeology and explains what it entails without confusion.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?: Yes, it gives a list and links to each section of the page so readers can easily access all information and reach sections that they are interested in.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?: No, the information in the lead is all present in the article.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?: I think that it gives perfect amount of information for readers to see what the topic is without giving it all away and providing unnecessary information.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?: Yes, the information is all relevant to the topic
Is the content up-to-date?: The content is up to date
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?: The list of urban archaeologists does not include much detail about each but does list them.

Is the article neutral?: Yes, the article is neutral and does not slant any way or have clear biases.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?: No claims seem biased towards a position or person.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?: I think more details about specific urban archaeologists could have boosted the article content more.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?: No, there is nothing that persuades or pushes narratives on readers in the article or that influences their thinking strongly.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?: Some of the information is, others had to be searched on internet further.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?: Could be more detailed included in article.
Are the sources current?: Yes, they are current.
Check a few links. Do they work?: One of the links did not work.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?: Yes, it is very easy to understand and no issues with how it was written.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?: No grammatical or spelling errors in the article.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?: Yes, it was broken down well and put into appropriate sections.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?: No images were included at all.
Are images well-captioned?: N/A
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?: N/A
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?:N/A

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?: No conversations are going on behind the scenes.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?: There are no ratings or WikiProjects listed.
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?: Wikipedia seems to talk about pretty similarly, although not as many examples as we do in class.

What is the article's overall status?: Overall, the article's status is pretty good with potential to be boosted even more.
What are the article's strengths?: Strengths is its explanations and descriptions of terminology and clearly explains what urban archaeology aims to do.
How can the article be improved?: It could be improved by adding more secondary sources for people to look at and descriptions of urban archaeologists.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?: I would say it is well-developed for the most part with a couple of areas mentioned above to improve on.

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 — ~~~~