User:Maloqueiro99/Evaluate an Article
Complete your article evaluation below. Here are the key aspects to consider:
Lead section
A 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.
- Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
- Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
- Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
- Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
Content
A good Wikipedia article should cover all the important aspects of a topic, without putting too much weight on one part while neglecting another.
- Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
- Is the content up-to-date?
- Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
- Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
Tone and Balance
Wikipedia 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.
- Is the article neutral?
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
Sources and References
A 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.
- Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
- Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
- Are the sources current?
- Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
- Are there better sources available, such as peer-reviewed articles in place of news coverage or random websites? (You may need to do some digging to answer this.)
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Organization and writing quality
The writing should be clear and professional, the content should be organized sensibly into sections.
- Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
- Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
- Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Images and Media
- Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
- Are images well-captioned?
- Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
- Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
Talk page discussion
The 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.
- What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
- How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
- How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Overall impressions
- What is the article's overall status?
- What are the article's strengths?
- How can the article be improved?
- How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
Examples of good feedback
A 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 ](Provide a link to the article here.) Netflix
Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
[edit ](Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)
I choose this article to evaluate because I wanted to understand more about the companies culture and if they have any negative impacts on the environment. Netflix started to produce its own content in 2013, hence their emissions of CO2 into the environment has increased since then.
The lead section is really concise and straight to the point, we can clearly identify the companies objective and the service it provides. This paragraph also offers some key statics about the company so the reader can understand the dimension of the company itself (number of subscribers, ranking in the fortune 500, etc). The lead section also briefly mentions the history of the company, which helps to entice the reader on continuing reading its history later on in the article with more detail. Overall, the lead is detailed and points out the key facts about the company.
The content is relevant to the to the topic. The article is divided in to History, content of the platform, technology corporate affairs and awards. The information in each of these sub sections are really detailed and concise, the reader is easily able to extract information of the article. I believe that the content is up to date.
The article relies on a variety of sources, including news articles, industry reports, and interviews with Netflix executives. The sources are cited throughout the article, and the information provided is largely verifiable.
The article is very concise and detail, every information found in the article is relevant for the company. Each section is broken down with sub titles including the dates of the occurrences and there are graphs to help understand the progress of the company over the years. The images in the article are correctly used. However, I would include more photos with the tv shows that Netflix has to offer.
overall, this article is really well written and it helps the reader to easily understand the message netflix wants give out to its customers. However, under environmental impacts there is only one small paragraph mentioning their contributions to the environment. So, my recommendation would to talk in greater depth and enrich this part of the article.