User:Alexschmidt711/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Dhimmi

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I was assigned this article for a class.

Evaluate the article

 * The lead successfully introduces its subject in its opening sentence, and it does mention everything included in the article itself. However, it does not give the same weight to certain subjects as the article itself. For example, it includes a whole paragraph on restrictions on dhimmis without mentioning anything about the dhimmi communities themselves, despite the latter having just as long of a section in the article itself. The lead also contains some citations which are not found in the article itself, which should not happen.
 * Most of the article's content is connected to the topic, but it is missing many important details. For example, it makes no mention of how the dhimmi system changed over time, and while it does link to the article "dhimmitude," that a notable term that derives from the concept of dhimmi is not mentioned in the article itself seems like an omission. The "Cultural interactions and cultural differences" section also, as written, does not add much revelatory knowledge to the article, although a section on interactions between Muslims and dhimmis could be an important section if expanded and rewritten. Some information is also repeated, such as information on the restrictions dhimmi were subject to.
 * While many perspectives on dhimmi law are explained, the restrictions imposed on dhimmis are overemphasized. However, the article as a whole does not slant particularly in one direction.
 * The sources are mostly relevant scholars, and many opinions from Islamic legal scholars are included in addition to many comments from scholars from outside the Middle East, although there are likely sources from Middle Eastern scholars that could replace some of the outside sources. However, the restrictions section of the lead has one completely unsourced statement and one statement sourced to what seems to be the New Catholic Encyclopedia, which shouldn't be an appropriate source on Islamic matters. The section in question also seems to plagiarize from the latter source. While older sources are likely still relevant to this topic, the article could benefit from a supplement of newer sources. The "external links" section seems to be both unnecessary and biased towards the opinion that the dhimmi practice was intolerant, and one link does not work anymore.
 * The article is not organized very well, as the textual basis for dhimmi status is only included near the end, when it should be merged with the section on the origin of the dhimma contract. The views of modern Islamic figures should also be placed towards the end in a discussion of what has happened to the dhimmi practice today. This should probably be followed by a section on the rights and restrictions applied to dhimmis, and then a section or sections about the history of dhimmi communities and status. The formatting and writing style is mostly suitable, although there are oddities such as the use of five consecutive single-sentence paragraphs at the end of the subsection on jizya.
 * There are no images included, but none are really necessary.
 * In the past, there has been much debate over the article, but the debate seems to have quieted down a bit more recently. The debate over the "second class citizens" characterization was fairly strong, so I am curious how it was settled on as the final. The article is rated B-class.
 * Overall, I'd give the article a C, since while it has plenty of relevant information it's missing a lot too, and has some biased or plagiarized sections. Its strengths lie in the fairly large number of references and perspectives, but it lacks discussion of many important matters and is somewhat inconsistent in what type of article it is trying to be.