User:Alexdaviesmorris/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
City block

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I chose this article because superblocks are essential for alternative urban city planning that is mindful of carbon emissions and encourages community-focused markets. My preliminary reaction to this article is that it seems very well planned–it appears to contain a very brief, yet comprehensive, introduction to the topic and outlines several examples of implementations of superblock city planning around the world.

Evaluate the article
Lead Section

This article contains a two sentence introduction explaining the design and function of superblocks, which is very effective in providing a brief overview of the topic. However, this introduction does not provide a comprehensive overview of the article as a whole. It fails to provide a short overview of the various sections of the article, specifically its varying implementations across the globe. Other than that, it does not provide information that is irrelevant to the rest of the article and is very concise in its description.

Content

The content is very comprehensive by providing the several definitions for superblocks throughout history and across different regions. However, in the "Definitions and typologies" section, the article uses a lot of architecture and city planning jargon that is not linked to other wikipedia sites. This section could also benefit from including some type of graphic or diagram to further cement readers' comprehension. Additionally, it focuses more on the historical uses for superblocks without touching on the current plans for citizen spaces for superblocks in countries like Spain.

Tone and Balance

For the most part, the article's demarcations of differing content are logical and help break down the reading, However, in some cases, historical cases of superblock development are grouped with other cases without a clear link as to why they are connected, as they are not nearly as developed in terms of content. The author maintains a strictly neutral and factual view in describing superblocks. However, as mentioned before, it does not depict the current plans for superblocks, only focusing on historical uses.

Sources and References

There are several instances where the author makes claims without citations. All of the sources are relatively current and are related to the topic.

Organization and Writing Quality

The article is nicely divided into relevant sections, although some portions of information are included in certain sections without properly developing the content in a manner that justifies its inclusion in that specific section. The writing is very clear and concise while being informative.

Images and Media

For the images that are included in the article, they elevate the readers' understanding and provide adequate information for its specific section. However, there are a couple of portions of the article that would benefit from including some form of graphic or diagram as they use complex architectural terms. However, some of the visuals are small, which obscures the information within them.

Talk Page Discussion

There are not many comments specifically aimed toward superblocks, but there is a lengthy discussion on various terminology around cityblocks in general. It is rated a level four vital article in the section of Geography.

Overall Impressions

Overall, the article is very strong in its depth and description of superblocks. While it may have drawbacks in certain citations and images, it is very well-rounded. It could use improvement specifically in furthering the development of content to more than just historical accounts of superblocks. Additionally, certain claims need citations and several content sections would benefit from comprehensive and readable graphics.