User:Zacharysoto96/Evaluate an Article
Evaluate an article
[edit]This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.
- Name of article: Deployable Operations Group
- Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I am pursuing a career in law enforcement. As well as enlisting in the Coast Guard after this semester of college.
Lead
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
- Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
Lead evaluation
[edit]The lead introduction includes information that is not present in the article, the introductory sentence is concise and describes the topic, but does not include the major sections. The article uses the past tense "WAS" alot.
[edit]Content
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
Content evaluation
[edit]The articles content is relevant to the topic, DOG is a command that deploys Special forces groups such as MSRT, MSST and taclet teams which is mentions, it seems like it is updated more recently, the last time is was edited was about two weeks ago, I believe some special forces groups are missing information that could be added.
Tone and Balance
[edit]- Guiding questions
- Is the article neutral?
- Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
- Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
- Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
Tone and balance evaluation
[edit]The article seems to be neutral and does not claim to favor any particular sections or group, this article is more informational rather than persuasive.
Sources and References
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
- Check a few links. Do they work?
Sources and references evaluation
[edit]I checked the sources and they seem to be working and are up to date with the article, the sources in the references represent the information that is being projected in this article.
Organization
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
Organization evaluation
[edit]The article is well written, I believe it could use some editing on the words used and grammar in the lead, it could also use more information for each special group.
Images and Media
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
Images and media evaluation
The images in the article are shortly captioned I think it could be a little more specific, they adhere to the regulations, and enhance the reading better but the pictures could be positioned better in my opinion and more pictures could be used to let the reader understand better if they weren't familiar with the topic.
Checking the talk page
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
Talk page evaluation
[edit]The article does not have alot of conversation going on, and it is part of a WikiProject, the last comment was made about two years ago.
Overall impressions
[edit]- Guiding questions
- 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?
Overall evaluation
[edit]overall I think the article could use more work, some of the strengths are how the article informs about each special unit, but not to the extent that it can. The lead could use a little more information when transitioning to the contents, it could use some more information and positioned better for the reader.
Optional activity
[edit]- 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 — ~~~~
- Link to feedback: Talk:Deployable Operations Group