User:141.161.133.110/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: The Perks of Being a Wallflower
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I chose this article to evaluate because The Perks of Being a Wallflower is one of my favorite novels, and I really enjoyed its adaptation into a film. It was a book recommended to me by a school's reading list, so it is interesting that it was a banned book. I am eager to learn more about its reception and other reasons that it was challenged.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Yes, I think that this sentence is comprehensive and concise. It provides relevant introductory information that a reader would need for context.
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Yes, the lead mentions each topic that will later be described.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No, all presented information is covered in the body of the article.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The lead is concise.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes, it is relevant.
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * The content is fairly up to date given that one of its sources is dated in 2018.
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * There is no content missing, though its censorship could benefit from some more detail. All the content is relevant to the topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, there are no apparent opinions included.
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * No.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * No, the article includes both the novel's positive and negative feedback.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * No. The article contains information.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes -- though there are many from the year 2014.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * For the most part, yes. However, the summary sentences can get too long and rambling making it hard for a reader who has never read the book to follow.
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * There are a few minor grammatical errors.
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
 * Yes, the article is well-organized in the same order the lead suggests.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Yes.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Yes, all images are correctly attributed.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * Yes.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * There are a lot of comments about the book's censorship and reception, signaling a desire to round out this section of the article with more information.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is rated GA, mid importance. It is a part of WikiProject Novels, WikiProject Pennsylvania, WikiProject Pittsburgh, WikiProject LGBTQ Studies, and WikiProject Children's literature.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Wikipedia gives an unbiased summary of important factors of the novel and omits analysis.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * The article is public and relatively complete.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * It is comprehensive in summary and author's inspiration.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * It could include more information on censorship and musical references. It could also include more of the author's bio.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * I think it is complete and developed though could address some of the

Overall evaluation
strong

Optional activity

 * 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: