User:DakotaM72/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: 2001 Arkansas Razorback football team (2001 Arkansas Razorbacks football team)
Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose the Arkansas Razorback article to evaluate, I have been a big fan of every kind of football since I was young so the article is interesting.

Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, it describes who they represented and what division they were playing in, while also providing who is on the roster.
Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? This article mostly contains information on the games played in the 2001 season, this article goes into detail about every game and describes it thoroughly. This article also stats all the players who were on the teams roster.
Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? All the information provided in the lead is covered throughout the rest of the article.
Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? The lead is concise, it was described well in the short amount of words used.

Is the article's content relevant to the topic? The articles content is relevant to the topic, it goes into detail about the 2001 season and the games played.
Is the content up-to-date? The content contains information from 2001, meaning all the information which is from 2001 which would make it up to date.
Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? The content in the article belongs there, it goes through all the games they played throughout the games.

Is the article neutral? The article about the Arkansas Razorbacks is neutral, all the information in this article about the games is backed up with facts and statistics.
Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? As stated before no heavily biased opinions were in this article, all the information listed was statistics and facts about the game.
Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? The points in this article were represented fairly, since it's an article about football all the information is facts from throughout the season.
Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No the article doesn't attempt to persuade, the article is simply for information purposes to let people know all the details on the 2001 season.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? The stats on the games in this article were from sources such a ESPN and CBS, very reliable sources.
Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? The article is using the proper amount of backup sources and providing the information properly, each piece of information provided was backed or from a reliable source.
Are the sources current? The sources in this article are very current, they are still who reports and displays the games to this day even though this was 19 years ago.
Check a few links. Do they work? All the links I checked such as the other teams links and player names worked well, article is well put together and very informative.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? This article is concise and easy to read, it is straight and to the point about describing the coaches, players, and games.
Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? While reading this article I myself did not notice any grammatical issues or spelling errors.
Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? It is very well broken down, it clearly specifies what each part of the article is about or what you're about to be reading. It has bold letters stating the topic before displaying the information about it.

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? This article does not include images, it does include links of many of the players and coaches and such so you could see those for a picture of that.
Are images well-captioned? There are no images provided in this article, you must follow the links to see images.
Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? There were no images provided in this article to violate the copyright regulations.
Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? The article contains no images, it is packed with information.

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Nothing going on behind the scenes, when this article was written they simply stated statistics behind the players, coaches, and games.
How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? The article is rated a c-class. It is part of "WikiProject College football", "WikiProject United States", and "WikiProject Arkansas".
How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? This article describes it very well by describing many details and helping the readers understand what exactly is going on, and what happened in the 2001 Razorbacks season.

What is the article's overall status? The article was rated a c-class rating, This article was very informative and provided accurate information on the games.
What are the article's strengths? The articles strengths include providing a proper amount of information on all the facts about the 2001 Arkansas Razorback football team.
How can the article be improved? The article could be improved if images were added, images would make the article more interesting.
How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say overall the article is well-developed, only thing I would surely change is adding a image into this article. The "2001 Arkansas Razorbacks football team" article is complete.

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 — ~~~~