Use this article summary template to record seven things: source, purpose, central claim, evidence, context, limits, and verification notes. Fill the fields from the original article before writing polished prose. Then turn the record into a short or extended summary, attribute the ideas to the source, and mark anything you have not checked. The template organizes your reading; it does not prove that the article or your interpretation is correct.
Publication and evidence note: Heni Hazbay, creator of Summarise Visually, has a direct interest in the app. This guide was drafted with AI assistance and editorially checked against the cited University of Kansas guidance and current project evidence. The seven-field template, short and extended variants, and fictional library example are original editorial assets, not independent results. No representative webpage-extraction or summary-accuracy benchmark was run; product claims stay within the verified boundaries stated below.
Copy the seven-field article summary template
The template below keeps source description separate from your evaluation. Copy it into your notes and replace each prompt with information you can trace to the article.
ARTICLE SUMMARY RECORD: SOURCE AND ARGUMENT
1. Source
Title:
Writer or organization:
Publisher:
Publication or update date:
URL:
Date accessed:
2. Purpose
The article aims to [explain / argue / report / compare / propose]:
The question or problem it addresses is:
3. Central claim
In one source-attributed sentence:
Source location:
4. Supporting evidence
Evidence item 1 + source location:
Evidence item 2 + source location:
Evidence item 3 + source location:Complete the source and argument block before deciding what to omit. Then use the context and checking block to preserve the boundaries around those claims.
ARTICLE SUMMARY RECORD: CONTEXT AND CHECKING
5. Context
Population, place, period, definitions, assumptions, or debate:
6. Limits and qualifications
Conditions, exceptions, counterarguments, uncertainty, or missing evidence:
7. Verification notes
Names, numbers, quotations, links, tables, or claims checked:
Items still unverified:
Material not captured in the text:This structure reflects a core distinction in the University of Kansas guidance on paraphrase and summary: a summary condenses the main ideas of a larger source, while still requiring attribution. The seven fields extend that principle into a checkable reading record.
Fill the template in source order
Start with identity and purpose before extracting details. This sequence prevents an isolated statistic or vivid story from becoming the supposed point of the whole article.
1. Record the source
Copy the title, writer or responsible organization, publisher, date, URL, and access date. If the page has no named writer or date, state that instead of guessing. Note whether you used a live page, downloaded copy, print view, or supplied excerpt.
Version details matter when a publisher updates a page or posts a correction. Your summary should describe the version you read, not an undated idea of the article.
2. Define the article’s purpose
Choose a reporting verb that matches what the writer does. “Reports” suits a news account or result. “Argues” suits a defended position. “Explains” suits an instructional or conceptual piece. “Proposes” suits a recommendation not yet established as fact.
Complete the purpose field in one sentence. If you need several unrelated verbs, the article may contain multiple parts that require an extended summary.
3. Write the central claim
State the main conclusion or controlling idea in your own words. Attribute it to the article or writer. Check the sentence against the introduction and conclusion, because either section alone may omit how the position develops.
Do not insert your agreement, disagreement, or outside knowledge here. Save those comments for a separate response or evaluation section.
4. Select supporting evidence
Record two or three items that carry different parts of the reasoning. Label what each item does, such as “defines the scale,” “supports the comparison,” or “addresses an objection.” Include a section heading, paragraph note, page number, or other source location.
If the article cites a study, report, or interview, distinguish that underlying source from the article’s own conclusion. Inspect the original publication before presenting its result as independently verified.
5. Add context
Context sets boundaries around the claim. Capture who or what the article discusses, where and when the evidence applies, how key terms are defined, and which assumptions shape the argument.
A short summary does not need every background detail. It does need any detail whose removal would make a reasonable reader misunderstand the scope.
6. Preserve limits and qualifications
Look for exceptions, uncertainty, counterarguments, data gaps, and alternative explanations. Writers may place them near the end, in captions, or beside individual results rather than in a section called “limitations.”
Use the writer’s level of certainty. Do not turn “may be associated with” into “causes,” or “some participants” into “people.”
7. Keep a verification record
List the details you checked and the ones you did not. Check names, dates, quantities, comparisons, negatives, and direct quotations against the source. Review tables, charts, footnotes, images, and linked documents separately because extracted body text may not preserve them.
The verification field lets a future reader distinguish a checked summary from a draft. It also gives you a direct route back to a disputed sentence.
Convert the record into a short summary
Use this format when you need one paragraph:
[Writer or publication] [reporting verb] that [central claim] in [scope or context].
The article supports this position with [evidence item 1] and [evidence item 2].
It also notes [material qualification or limit].Keep the source attribution in the first sentence. Add only evidence that a reader needs to understand why the article reaches its conclusion. If you cannot fit a material qualification, the requested summary is too short for the claim as written.
Use the extended summary format
Use this outline for a longer assignment or briefing:
- Source and purpose: identify the article and explain its task
- Central claim: state the controlling conclusion with attribution
- Reasoning and evidence: explain the two or three main supporting moves
- Context: preserve definitions, population, period, or debate that controls scope
- Limits: report exceptions, counterarguments, and uncertainty
- Verification status: identify what you checked and what remains unresolved
Keep your analysis outside these six parts unless the assignment explicitly combines summary and response. The article summary versus paraphrase guide explains why condensation, close restatement, and evaluation serve different purposes.
Completed example of the template
This fictional example demonstrates the format. It does not describe a real article or a product test.
Source: “Library Extends Weekend Trial,” by Jordan Lee, Northside Bulletin, July 1, 2026, fictional URL, accessed July 20, 2026.
Purpose: The article reports how a six-week extension of Saturday library hours affected visits and staff planning at one branch.
Central claim: Lee reports that visits increased during the trial, while staffing and transport constraints affected whether the schedule could continue.
Supporting evidence: The article compares Saturday entry counts before and during the six-week trial. It also includes comments from the branch manager and two visitors. The comparison supports a change in visits, while the comments explain practical effects rather than proving the cause.
Context: The report concerns one branch and a six-week period. It does not compare seasonal patterns or other branches.
Limits: The article does not establish whether longer hours alone caused the change. It gives no cost breakdown and does not measure access for people who did not visit.
Verification notes: Entry-count wording, trial dates, and attributed comments checked against the fictional source record. No transport data or staffing document available.
The resulting short summary could read: “Jordan Lee reports that visits to one library branch increased during a six-week trial of extended Saturday hours. The article compares entry counts and describes staff and visitor experiences, but it does not establish that the schedule alone caused the increase or provide a full cost analysis.”
Notice that the summary retains the one-branch scope and the difference between measured entries and reported experiences. It does not convert the article into a general claim about every library.
Use the template with Summarise Visually
Current project review supports supplied text and a bounded route for compatible public webpages. It does not establish access to every article, complete extraction from every page, or automatic source verification.
Use the app as one drafting input:
- Record the source fields yourself before generating a summary.
- Supply permitted text or try the compatible public-webpage route.
- Generate a result suited to the length and format you need.
- Place each output claim into the matching template field.
- Return to the source and add locations, context, limits, and unresolved checks.
- Rewrite the final summary so its attribution and certainty match the article.
Do not infer that a blank field means the source had nothing to say. The route may have missed content, or the generated result may have omitted it. Treat gaps as questions for source review.
Source and evidence note
The template uses the University of Kansas distinction between summary and paraphrase as its primary writing source. That page was accessed on July 20, 2026. The seven-field record, short variant, long variant, and library example were created for this guide.
Product statements reflect current project review, not a benchmark. No representative set of articles was tested for extraction completeness or summary accuracy for this page.
Limits and verification
A template can organize a reader’s checks, but it cannot establish that an article’s claims are correct, complete, current, or fairly evidenced. Verify consequential statements against the original article and, where needed, its linked primary sources.
Compatible public-webpage processing may omit dynamic text, captions, tables, footnotes, or content behind access controls. Supplied passages can exclude surrounding context. Keep those omissions in the verification field rather than filling them with assumptions.
Follow your instructor, employer, or publisher’s rules for attribution and AI assistance. A completed template is a reading record, not proof of independent authorship or permission to reuse protected text.
Learn the full source-checked article summary method, use a long-article section map, or decide whether your task requires a summary or paraphrase.