User:ATlakehead/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Anowa

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
This article is about the first text we read and discussed in class. I believe that having a little more background information on the play after analyzing it will help to improve the quality of the page and the information it presents to its readers. My first impression of the article is not favourable, as it is incredibly short and not very detailed. The article lacks any in-text citations, and only two different references are used. Additionally, one of the cited sources simply links to the text of the play, rather than any information about it. Because this is a C-class Wikipedia article, I think it would be good practice to evaluate it and see all the different places it could be improved upon. This will also help in the future when we work on improving our assigned Wikipedia article, as having a "bad" example to work from can illustrate what not to do when writing a Wikipedia article.

Evaluate the article
Firstly, the article lacks a good lead section. There is no differentiating between what might be the intended lead and the rest of the article, so some kind of break should be added. While the first few sentences do introduce the play and what it might be about, the second sentence seems to just repeat the first using different language. If the article were to be improved, it would need a distinct lead section that is separated from the rest of the article. Additionally, there is no sidebar containing the "quick" information a casual reader might be looking for, such as a poster or promotional image for the play, the author and publishing date, genre, setting, or other relevant details. For example, the Wikipedia page for Shakespeare's Hamlet contains a picture of an actor in the lead role, a list of main characters, the language it was originally written in, setting, and genre.

In the article, there is also very little content. There are a few sentences that talk about the plot of Anowa, but the reader has no context for this information. Ideally, the plot of Anowa would be detailed in its own section, apart from the lead and any other sections. It is common for any work of fiction to have a plot summary section, so this would fit in well. In addition to the plot summary section, another section on the "themes" of the play could be added. The original article mentions the old man and woman characters whob represent the "Chorus" of the play. This section could be expanded to discuss the roles of these characters, if an appropriate academic source could be found to support the analysis. The content of the article could also use a change in tone, as some details are assumed rather than substantiated. For example, the original article for Anowa does not make note of the play's ambiguous ending and instead simply states that Anowa dies at the end of the play. This part of the article is misleading to a casual reader who might not have the necessary background information.

While most of the writing in the article for Anowa is gramatically correct, some phrases are ambiguous or open to interpretation. As previously stated, Anowa has an ambiguous ending, and the stage instructions in the text of the play even dictate that the final scene of the play is "optional." The Wikipedia article should inform the reader of this, so there is no confusion. There are also no citations to back up any of the information stated in the article. While two references are used, there are no in-text citations to indicate where the sources were cited, or what information might be taken from these particular sources. In order to improve the article, more academic and unbiased sources could be found, and in-text citations should be added to indicate what information has been taken from them. Furthermore, there is a misplaced semicolon in the second sentence of the article, and the overall structure of the sentence is confusing.

In addition to the scant information available on the Wikipedia page for Anowa, the talk page also has no discussion on potential improvements that could be made to the page. While the article is part of a WikiProject to improve theatre-related pages, no actual improvements or edits have been made to the article so far. The page needs a more dedicated editor or information added. If the page were to be improved further, users could also add some images from performances of Anowa, or perhaps some media related to the topic. For example, link to a stage-reading of the play or perhaps a YouTube video of a performance. This would overall improve the reader's experience on the page. To also contribute, a section about performances of the play or reviews it might have received could be added.

Overall, the Wikipedia page in its current form does not contribute much to the reader's information about the topic. There is a little information present, but nothing is very detailed or helpful to a reader that might be looking to learn more about the play or author.