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. |
I chose this article because it is directly related to my class, and is applicable to topics that we are learning and plan to learn. My impression of it was that it gives a good summary of the topics that we would go over in class, related to human cognition.
The article defined human cognition in a manner that was simple to understand. It specifically stated the topics that cognition addresses, and the subjects that are similar, such as perception, attention, reasoning, and decision making. The overall tone of the article was neutral, seeing that there weren't any explicit opinions or instances of biased persuasion. Additionally, the links to the sources throughout the article all work and were reliable sources. There is variety in the sources that are used, seeing that there are websites about different theorists, and their contributions, as well as subcategories of the topic of cognition itself. (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.)