User:412timothy/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Stephen Curry

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because I am a huge basketball fan. It matters since Steph Curry is one of the world's greatest basketball players and needs to have the most up to date and correct information posted about him on sites such as wikipedia. Overall, it looks great on first glance with a ton of citations and sources listed very clearly.

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.)

Does the lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
The first sentence is very clear and gets straight to the point! IT demonstrates his accolades well and describes him in a great way.

Does the lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
Yes! there is a description with all of the content links going through all of the article.

Does the lead include information that is not present in the article? (It shouldn't.)
No.

Is the lead concise or is it overly detailed?
It's a little overly detailed, but this is a big figure name so I can see how this is as concise as it can be!

Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
Yes! It goes through his entire early life, college highlights, and even goes through each major season and overall just career highlights! Even showcases his most recent achievements.

Is the content up-to-date?
Yes, the content is very up to date.

Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
No content missing that I can see! I can only see something with a production company that I did not know about but could be an element that I do not know about him yet.

Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
No it does not!

Is the article neutral?
The article is incredibly neutral as even in the introduction they say that some consider Steph as the greatest of all time. If it came from a more biased perspective then it would have stated that he is the greatest of all time. This is good because it provides the reader the opportunity to be aware of it, but not necessarily declaring it to the readers.

Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
There does not seem to be any claims towards bias, but comes at a very neutral stance.

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
His most recent seasons are a bit overrepresented as they each have their own sections while this early career from 2009-2014 has its own tab.

Overall his page heavily features basketball and does not feature that much of his personal life or any other achievements. This makes sense as he is an incredibly successful professional basketball player, but it does only focus on his basketball career. You would only understand the impressiveness of this if you were a basketball fan as it contains a lot of jargon.

Are minority or fringe viewpoints accurately described as such?
The points are incredibly accurate as it showcases his career very well up to now.

Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
This article does not try to persuade at all. It focuses on the facts very well and just tries to showcase his basketball career. Most specifically it talks about his career highlights and then goes in depth with how these games were won and key moments within each game.

Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
Yes ! They are all backed up by a reliable secondary source.

Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
Yes!

Are the sources current?
Yes!

Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
Yes! At the same time this article is semi-protected which means only a select few can edit this.

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.)
Hmmm... some articles and sources are from other websites such as CSN when they should probably be from ESPN instead but other than that it is very clear and thorough.

Check a few links. Do they work?
Yes! Checked many of the links and they work fine.

Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
It is very clear and well written! The authors do a great job at being descriptive but also keeping a professional tone and language to it.

Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
No!

Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?
Yes!

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

Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
Yes

What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
A lot of it is correcting stats to make sure that they are accurate. At the same time it is just correcting minor or little things such as grammar and spelling.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
It is rated as B-Class and is a part of WikiProjects. These are biographies, collect basketball, San Francisco, and NBA projects.

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
Definitely more detailed than our conversation in class but also does not showcase all perspectives of Steph Curry. It mainly just highlights over his basketball career, while class time would have brought more than that.

What is the article's overall status?
Status of the article is great! It is in good shape with past and current information being well documented and accurate. It however did not meet the good article criteria as of October 23 2021. It could use some improvement.

What are the article's strengths?
Incredibly detailed and well put together!

How can the article be improved?
It is super dense and long paragraphs of text... It can be hard to follow and read through its entirety. I do wish they used more charts or graphs to showcase the season by season data.

How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
It is very well developed!