User:AlphabetAlabaster/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: Flora Tristan
 * We read and discussed her work in class.

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.
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * No.
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?
 * The Lead is concise.

Lead evaluation
Strong lead. Concise description of the basic contributions of Flora Tristan, which does not include unnecessary information, nor does it fail to describe the article's major sections.

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?
 * There is no missing content, yet some content may not belong, as it presents value judgements which may not represent the kind of scholarly information suitable for Wikipedia.
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics?
 * It does. The article centers around an important early feminist and her contributions to feminist literature.

Content evaluation
Fairly strong, but it may include some content which is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Yes, in that it does not present biased sources. However, it tends to praise its subject when it should stay neutral.
 * 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?
 * Not really, though it does write very favorably about Tristan when it should refrain from making value judgements

Tone and balance evaluation
Does well in presenting unbiased sources, yet sometimes praises its subject too strongly.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * For the most part, though not always.
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Yes.
 * Are the sources current?
 * For the most part, though a few are quite old.
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible?
 * Yes, they certainly do.
 * Check a few links. Do they work?
 * Yes.

Sources and references evaluation
Well done, but a few sources could be updated, and another few details could use extra citations.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Yes, but a few sentences are poorly worded.
 * 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.

Organization evaluation
Organization is clear, but the author could tidy up some sentences' wording to improve its clarity.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Yes, it even includes a family tree.
 * 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, as far as I can tell.

Images and media evaluation
No issues here. Strong use of images to convey important details about the figure, though maybe the article could stand to include a couple more images. The need is not urgent, however.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * Conversations about citations and formatting dominated the discussion.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is generally rated as low importance. It is part of several WikiProjects, including a few about Women in literature.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * It includes much more biographical information about Tristan than we discussed in class, as we focused mainly on her ideas and not her personal history.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * It is fairly informative, though it seems like relatively little attention is paid to it. Calls for citations are sometimes ignored for long spells, and the writing style can be improved.
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * Presents a wide variety of unbiased information on the subject. Quite thorough, considering the subject's relative importance.
 * How can the article be improved?
 * Provide a few more citations, remove biased language, and clarify wording in spots.
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?
 * Very complete. Not underdeveloped at all.

Overall evaluation
Strong article in terms of content, but has a few minor issues especially with citations and style which should be addressed.

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: