User:Ajlappenbusch/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: [ Clone High]
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: It's a series I personally enjoy and I hope that my evaluation makes its page stronger and more accessible

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?
 * yes (contents table)
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * no
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * Could perhaps be a bit more concise, but overall pretty solid.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Yes
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Yes! Some really new info about the reboot has already been added
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?
 * The controversey section kind of fails to give credence to Indian dissatisfaction with how Gandhi was portrayed, possibly due to a lack of information available. We know that there was outrage, but it could have been helpful to include specific scenes with episode numbers of where offensive depictions occurred.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * Not really, unless you want to count the less than ideal depiction of gay characters on the show.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Clearly written by fans, but still manages to stay relatively nuetral
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * They mention Clone High's 'cult following' but they don't really have evidence to support that claim. They link to the article on a cult following which is great, but it would be nice to see some article acknwledging the fanbase cited there.
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Not particularly, most are based directly on the show's episodes.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?
 * It may lean them toward liking the show, but the show's content is also largely appealing so I can't say I find that to be an issue of neutrality.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Mostly yes, some appear to not be but only due to a lack of reliable sourcing for this info (e.g. having a cult following)
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes certainly.
 * Are the sources current?
 * Yes where relevant
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Not really but it's also not a well covered topic
 * 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?
 * Under fair use they should be fine, however the talk page has pointed out the fair use is a bit questionable
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?
 * There could be more, or larger, but it's fine

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * LOTS! There have been a ton of cool edits made since inception, and some nice action items to work on such as the 'controversy' section
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * C-level article, not that I could find
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * We have not talked about it in class.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * I think it's good! Just not super well researched as it's more of a pop culture phenomenon
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * The way it adheres to the shows canon, the in depth descriptions of each episode, the character list
 * How can the article be improved?
 * more sources for some statements (if possible) regarding followings and controversies.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Well developed, especially for the content matter

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: