User:100%NotQualified/Evaluate an Article

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.

Peer review of this article about a famous painting

Which article are you evaluating?

Calorie count laws

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?

I chose this article as in class we have talked a lot about laws pertaining to food and I was curious if there were any articles about specific food regulatory laws. My first impression of this article was that it is very short and not very deep.

Evaluate the article

(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.)

The lead section of the article is concise and describes the what Calorie count laws are but I think misses a bit of the purpose. The article states "Studies of consumer behavior have shown that for some fast-food chains, consumers reduce calorie consumption but at other chains they do not" This I believe is getting at the Idea that listing the calories has been shown to reduce the overall calorie intake of consumers. It does not specifically mentioned that these changes are due to calorie listings at the chains in the article. I believe another miss on describing the purpose of the laws was missing that the laws were a part of a greater effort within food industry to promote transparency. After just a cursory glance on the web I found some details pointing to this and it could be a valuable piece to look into add to the article. The intro touched on some additional responses to the laws outside of just adding calorie counts. Adding these details about the additional responses was valuable but could have been expanded upon with some more depth.

The central content revolves around calorie laws in the U.S.. I think the content could be more valuable if it dove into the origin a bit more by describing significant actors in the laws creation or significant events in preamble to the laws creation. The sole focus is on U.S law and most other countries also have similar laws and could be expanded upon here as well. Another big miss in the content is never mentioning any laws around retail establishments who alongside the restaurants also have to put calorie labels on food products.

The tone of he article is informational and concise there was a strong bias toward just United states laws on the issue.

There are 9 references and the only one that gave me pause was "New Yorkers try to swallow calorie sticker shock" which was an article from NBC news. The article was used as a reference to prove the date of the first state calorie law in New York. I think it is unlikely to be biased about the information used from it but it is unlikely the original source of noted law.

The article is very concise and easy to read without any unnecessary details and may even want to add some sections and add details as it leaves a bit to be desired.

There are no images or other media in this article to evaluate.

There is no discussion going on on the talk page of this article.

Overall this article definitely fits its stub-class assessment. It could benefit a lot from some more in depth details on the purpose of calorie laws and their origin. Their origin could also benefit to being expanded to regions and countries outside the U.S like the EU.