User:19rtrudkin/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: Robert Grosseteste
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because Robert Grosseteste was an important scientist during 13th century England and is widely credited for advancing a period of scientific thought.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, the introductory sentence is very well done in this article and sums up the most important information about him.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? The lead does not separate into descriptions of the major sections, it does briefly mention his scientific contributions.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Everything mentioned in the lead is present in the article in its entirety.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is extremely concise and takes only one reading to understand exactly what is being conveyed.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? The article's content is very relevant to the topic and does not stray from the main idea.
Is the content up-to-date? This content is up to date with the last edit being made during June of 2020.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? Although all of his works are listed, not all of them are described by their impact on the scientific world.
Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? This does not deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps but Robert Grosseteste is not often mentioned in the field of science although he paved the way for educational, scientific thought in Britain.

Is the article neutral? This article is neutral and does not lean towards any opinion.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Some of the sources cited exaggerate his political career but the author of this article has done a great job of being neutral.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? Both the main viewpoints of his religious and scientific life have been properly represented.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? This article does not persuade the reader.

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?
Check a few links. Do they work?

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?

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?

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?

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 — ~~~~