User:ARH125/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: (Bed burial)
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate. I chose this article because, firstly, it was in the Archaeological-related section, and secondly because the concept seemed so outlandish to me that I had to learn more.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? possibly-- includes the "contents" section, but does not describe what the sections are in the Lead.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? concise, possibly too much so.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? missing content on "Ancient Greek Bed Burials."
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? no

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? no
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? yes. some sources possibly from too long ago but that might just be due to necessity.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes
 * Are the sources current? mixed-- some of the sources from the 20th century seem necessary to the article.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? spectrum of authors, yes. article is dealing with anglo-saxon burials, so I don't know if they could be considered "historically marginalized"
 * Check a few links. Do they work? yes

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? yes
 * 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

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
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? yes -- only one picture

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? some links being modified
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? rated C-class for wikiprojects in "anglo-saxon kingdoms", "archaeology", and "death"
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? doesn't include much about the context of these burials, and the culture surrounding them. We haven't specifically talked about this concept in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? unable to locate.
 * What are the article's strengths? very thorough anglo-saxon section. includes chart about specific bed burials and their coordinates.
 * How can the article be improved? add more about ancient greek burials and viking burials, or exclude it from the article.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? underdeveloped

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: